If you’re focused on the handful of times I said the word “problematic “ can you also please write in your comment that you didn’t watch the video til the end .
@@woodendoors9532 and people should watch the whole video before commenting dummy shit and not be an over sensitive man baby cause their viewpoints got criticized for 90 seconds.
If someone can't separate art from artist, that's fine, but if they judge me and criticise and shame me for it, then I start to get irritated. When it comes to myself, I have a high tolerance for it, but I think I just need to find where I personally draw the line.
Former implies on artists personal life. Latter quote implies on the quality of the music itself. Believe me, I try it all and there is a reason the latter gets clowned at.
Magicword is "to me". I have problem with woke stuff, because I see it causing problems in my personal life and in society and I dont want to be remembered in music when I try to escape from reality for some time. I do not see the same thread in far right stuff. The political opinions are often more extreme yes, but not that potent and viable. This is ofcourse my opinion and view on society. I understand everyone who doesnt want to listen to rightwing music or sees such ideas as an acute danger.
Yeah, I've had to check myself on that impulse, too. I get super irritated when a great band like Body Void virtue signals about capitalism or fascism, but I don't have nearly as bad of a reaction to Peste Noire. Which is kinda fucked. So I gotta ignore the bad politics and obnoxious takes of super left leaning bands just like I do with the far right or nationalist ones.
@@arryospeedwagon Takes awareness. It's the right wing stuff ironically that tends to do it''s thing casually meanwhile the left constantly is shouting at the door demanding your attention. Politics is cope. Overall, what always remains is music quality. Walls of text over mental gymnastics ensue meanwhile I'm spending about £888 on the first two pressings of GBK's albums.
great video, ive always hated both extremes of this arguement. people's boundaries should be respected and you shouldnt assume these things off what someone listens to. i honestly think this discussion is where music discussion in general gets the most toxic, it's just ego-boosting, vitriolic and never goes anywhere, but its great to see an actual mature evaluation
Was thinking about this today. Finn commented in a video about how AILD is F tier, because of what Tim did. Yet he's way on the Ronnie Radke train. Tim wasn't successful in doing what he set out to do, and was talking to an undercover the entire time. Ronnie actually did kill someone. Yet Ronnie get's a pass and Tim doesn't. I don't get it.
Yeah, he’s hypocritical as hell. He interviewed Jonny Craig (and tried to prop Johnny up as being “changed” despite him being the same old misogynist narcissist) but he told me and several other people in that comment section that he will not interview Tim Lambesis, which is wild. Tim did his time in prison and came out a more well-adjusted individual, while Johnny never changed.
Dude Ronnie never killed anyone, if you want to know the story of that search up "Ronnie radke correcting the narrative" on youtube. The video isn't defending Ronnie but correcting all the lies that have been pushed on Ronnie. I don't like Ronnie radke, but he didn't kill anybody. He went to jail because he didn't follow his parole
All it comes down to is whether you as a person want to separate the artist from the art. It’s simply a case-by-case basis, and depending on the person those boundaries are going to be different.
Why should we ? The artist is part of his art, wether we like it or not. What we actually can do is separate the esthetic enjoyment from any moral involvement.
@@GerdLPluu I'm not sure if that's just excercise in semantics. The phrase "separating the art from the artist" can be, in fact, different propositions. It can mean things like "you ought to not consume art from an artist that did some wrong acts.", "you ought to not consume art from an artist that have wrong beliefs, that are not included in their art", "you ought to not consume art from an artist that have wrong beliefs and it's prevalent in their art", "you ought to not support financially artists that (one of the above)" or even some non-ethical propositions. Those are differnet propositions and only some of possible interpretations of this phrase.
One reason it is very easy for me to separate art from artist is because I have been both far-left (age around 15-16) and far-right (age around 18-22) in my life. Since I have cooled down and matured alot. People who hate "commies" and "nazis" don't understand they could have ended up in the same place they did.
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I MEAN!! People are so quick to point fingers but don’t realize that behind every “villain” is just another broken man who could’ve been them were the roles reversed
@@wizzy5702 Correct. Even most perpetrators of mass killings in WW2 (Nazi and Soviet) were usually not psychopaths. So plenty of normal people could have ended up in that situation. And 99% of modern nazis and commies are not killers but thoughtcriminals.
@@moth7640 I was far-left because I mostly listened to rap (some of the political stuff) and was filled with white guilt and felt a bit miserable. But I was not completely programmed into far-leftism because when I read Noel Ignativ's "Racetraitor" online I felt a bit uneasy. I became more right wing when when I started listening to metal. I did not listen to metal because I did not have friend who listened to it and did not have instant access to it due to the internet. Though for over a year I listened to Burzum and some NS bands without my ideology changing. I was center left when I started listening to Burzum. I had a few bad experiences with some black people. Though I have had/have some black friends as well. In my country a Marxist and racist black politician (Julius Malema) also started getting popular so I had a lot of rage about him. That is probably the main reason I went to the radical right. I felt betrayed by the people I got into arguments with racists defending. If you look at the wikipedia article on "racism" there is literally a pic of him on this article. I could say metal saved me from being "woke", but it did not make me a racist because. Malema did. NSBM played a minor role. This was also around 2010. If I was born 10 years later I would probably not been pc or gone a NSBM rabbit hole. A funny story is in school (aged 18) there was a mixed raced girl who liked me and once asked me what I was listening to when I was listening to Arghoslent, so I was a bit embarrassed to say I was listening to "Flogging the Cargo" and she said "That does not sound nice."
used to be a hardcore Ancap until I fell on hard times. people change, its life, you grow up you get older, you get exposed to new points of view, etc etc.
Great discussion. Reminds me a lot of a surprisingly good twitter thread about art morality debate where they basically said this instinctive urge to consume "unproblematic" art stems from late stage capitalism in America making every aspect of life politic, even the act of consuming art/media because, they quote, activism is seemingly all we have left. To an extent I agree. But the individualism is the biggest point as you said, there is no definitive argument or answer to this debate.
"activism is seemingly all we have left", a farce of activism I would add, since what we call activists today are essentially useful idiots who think they are revolutionaries.
Behind the music/albums, these are just human beings. I'd never want to automatically align myself with any other human just because I like art they produce. It does feel good when you truly love the music and also respect who is behind it but If they have views that don't always align with mine, that is expected (yes, some extremes are unforgivable).
I personally think that it is possible, this particular subject is also an eternal struggle and my personal take on it is both on a case by case basis and how much you're willing to separate the art or where do you draw the line. And I have 2 examples. 1. Death in June, now they're a special case because Douglas P. is purposefully cryptic and even contradictory with his casual use of sketch symbols and provocative lyrics, so because there's that ambiguity and plausible deniability I can enjoy Death in June, though I am keenly aware of DI6 being problematic for basically the same reason. 2. Liturgy, this is a band I really wanted to get into, but I just can't stand how overblown, pretentious and obtuse the music is, and I hate that I can't get into it but I also won't force myself to like a band just because I respect the musicians behind it. However there are cases where I think it isn't possible to separate the art, and I'm not talking about just criminals. There are things that to me are just unacceptable, and should be ignored, not censored, _ignored_ and while I don't advocate for censorship at all, whenever any of those problematic artists cry about censorship, whether actual or perceived, and I'm not gonna shed tear for assholes having the ground crumble under the weight of their own bullshit, as is the case with Varg. Like, seeing a band bitching about getting booted off Bandcamp or having their Instagram deleted is so pathetic. And one more thing, since you didn't brought it up, but I don't often see people mention piracy or free downloads, because to me when you pay for an album by a sketch artist that's still a form of promotion, that being said, I'm *NOT* about to tell people how they should or shouldn't spend their own money. But back to piracy, if you like a problematic band, and don't want to support it by buying vinyl or shirts, just pirate it, if you just care about the music then download it, you don't owe any artist your money. But again, that's on just me, these are just my own conclusions and takes about it, and everyone is free to do whatever with their time and money, that isn't actually harming people. And finally yes, separating the art from the artist actually does go both ways and you can't selectively decide to make excuses for a Fash band, and then throw hissy fit when a RABM band gets big for whatever reason.
This can be a very tired subject but i think you expressed the nuances and annoyances that i see on both sides very well. Easily one of the most well done videos on this topic, in my onion. Thanks dude.b
Art is a reflection of life, life can be harsh and hateful, and not pretty. Some artists are bad people, some good people. Some art is bad some art is good.
very good video that surely sparked some not so good discussion^^ I mean discussion is arguably always good, but nowadays it mostly boils down to "here is my opinion and if you don't agree, you are my enemy". I think you made some great points, especially because it goes both ways as explained in your "good person makes bad music" example. thankfully I not only managed to separate art from artist but also fandom from art. I enjoy things (or don't!) and idgaf what everybody else thinks :D
For me It's really simple in my mind, I just enjoy the art without thinking about it much more than that. I can disagree with or straight up despise something someone has done but I just don't think about those points when looking at the art. But I can definitely understand why some people find it so hard to do that, it just makes sense. But I've just never thought like that. Not just speaking music, I watch a ton of movies too, some of which have been made by awful people. But for me it is just what it is. I like what you said about the art that someone consumes and who it's from does not define the person, we are multi layered and can enjoy some f*cked up art without it meaning we are f*cked up ourselves. Good video man.
I personally would avoid listening to music associated with individuals with dangerous ideologies, or criminal record involving violent and/or s*xual crimes to prevent the problematic person from touring. If they are on tour, they are all over the place, and can be a huge risk to innocent people.
@@necro6666 Right but if you are fine with allowing censorship then you can't really be opposed to it at the same time because censorship will always win if given the power to do so. By ideologically allowing an entity to be pro-censorship by you being anti-censorship in your own morals, you effectively allow censorship. It's an inherent contradiction in philosophical libertarianism as well that is still not exactly worked out. To rule out this inherent contradiction you either need to add an exception to the rule or drop the belief. The most plausible exception is that "no art should be censored unless that art itself censors"
I'm very far to the left and absolutely love Burzum to death. Ultimately I think it mostly depends on how good the art is, and individuals should judge it case by case. The beauty of art is that it can transcend divisions.
A lot of great artists are terrible people, I hate the term problematic but if an artist turns me off with their political views or have done horrendous actions I just pirate their records unless it's an album I really like then I don't really care if it's "problematic" not like my 20 bucks is going to create the rise of the fourth reich, life is too short and already filled with too many issues to micro manage the musicians/bands I listen to.
Hi thanks for your work. As well as the albums you review I've been enjoying some of the ones you feature on the shelf in the background, but sometimes I can't tell which artists they're by. Any chance you could please mention them in the episode descriptions? There's a few from past vids I wanna bug you about since the artwork looks intriguing 👍
People need to realizes it really all depends on person to person, cause there's some artist I don't personally feel comfortable listening to due to some shady stuff they've done and there's others I do find myself enjoying who have also done questionable stuff. People need to get off their superiority high horse and realize everyone thinks differently and is going to enjoy certain artists whether they like it or not. Love the video.
Fantastic and well thought video. Recently I've been more and thinking about a peculiar aspect of the problem that for me is very interesting. As you said, no art is free from controversy, and I know this very well, given the fact that I study latin and ancient greek: these two languages (and cultures) are deemed to be pillars of the European/west world, and of course they are full of things that today would be (rightfully) unacceptable. But this doesn't change the fact that they are fundamental and influential. And that's the point I am interested in: influence. Art made by bad people can affect somebody's life really positively, making them even a better person and inspiring them to create new and positive art. This way you can overcome the sense of guilt that may come with listening to a beloved problematic artist, because you transform their negativity in something that's the opposite. Art wins, bad person loses, because, with their hate, they have inspired love.
I think you can just listen to whatever you want and live a quiet, peaceful life. There will sadly never be a mutual agreement between everyone on this issue, so just simply enjoy what you enjoy and mind your business, there's no point in debating, arguing, etc. as it only leads to more division.
I definitely agree with your last point about "breaking points", and I think the best example is actually a band like Lostprophets. Maybe it's hypocritical that I can enjoy bands like Peste Noire, but if you know what Ian Watkins has done, it can be really, really hard to hear his voice and enjoy it.
Plus, they weren’t really anything special as a band anyways; very trend-hoppy bullshit. No Devotion (the band they formed after they dropped that disgusting piece of garbage of a human being) is way better in my honest opinion.
Lostprophets popped in my head about a year ago. I remembered listening to them when I was younger, and decided to see if they still hold up. I honestly don't remember much of the music I listened to because all I could think about was what he did. So fucked up.
@@BananaGeekLord The thing with that band with me was that I actually jumped off them before the whole thing about the lead singer came to light simply because I knew how much they were ripping off Linkin Park, and later, Good Charlotte. So when the news came out about the lead singer being a pedophile, I just simply said that I’m glad I’m no longer a fan of that band anymore.
I think that it really depends on the context of why each individual artists is problematic, rather than making blanket statements. For example Crystal Castles is music made through the explanation of a child. I don't think I could ever listen to it, and would be bothered if anyone around me was into it. But when it comes to artists that have only done something moderately bad, and also seem to have made a good faith effort to change, then I have no problem listening to their music, or giving them money
As someone who is very conservative you’ll find most artists tend to be liberal. So if I never listened to every artist I disagreed with politically there wouldn’t be much music left for me to listen to. Unless the politics start to influence the music and the music suffers for it, 9 times out of 10 I will overlook the revelation.
@@THICCTHICCTHICC No, most artists are vaguely liberal/progressive because the personality structure that correlates with creativity also somewhat dispositions you for such political views. The key word is correlation, of course.
@@someobserver844 agree it’s definitely the personality. No one in music is voting democrat because they think they’ll fund their tour or buy them new instruments
I look at extreme music the same as I view horror movies. I like the two forms of art basically as a thrill ride. My personal life is quite the opposite as I am very much a private person and reserved. Opposites attract sort of thing.
I still listen to some Lostprophets songs. I think nostalgia of having heard such songs in fond video games growing up is what keeps me from leaving those songs behind, despite what Ian has done.
I live very close to the town where Ian Watkins and the rest of the guys from Lostprophets are from. This comment stood out to me because NOBODY even acknowledges that the band even exists anymore. At one point everyone and anyone either loved the band or knew the band in some what shape or form. Overnight that died when Ian was outed for what he was. So, whilst not officially blacklisted, LP are not spoken of here, at all. So it’s really jarring to me to see someone say they still listen to the band. I have often wondered if people do, because they were so popular. I guess they do! 😅
Never cared for popularity, I just like some of their songs, three of them actually. Those songs I first heard in video games, and I miss a time when video games where good. I never got into their more popular songs. @@linesinwax4996
@@linesinwax4996 The band the rest of the members formed after walling themselves off from Ian (No Devotion) is much better anyways. Lostprophets weren’t anything special, looking back, at least to me.
Fantastic video with thoughtful takes, as usual! I think that I'm still not sure about myself as a fellow black metal RU-vid blogger - is the difference between "enjoying privately and not bringing up publicly", "enjoying privately and supporting financially", and "being open and honest that you personally enjoy some kind of problematic art and does not remove it from discussion". Recent example - Kaevum, fantastic black metal, problematic content that is not aligned both with my personal views and mainstream norms. Should I speak about it and share that I enjoyed this record publicly? I feel a bit dishonest with my emotions if I just keep it to myself when discussing black metal. Right now I just warn people - hey, the subject is often problematic, it does not reflect my views as a person, it is your choice as a viewer to think and choose for your self. At the same time, I just accept the double standard biased picture of my own regarding my favorite art, but I still try to find some good cohesive explanation for my actual behavior rather than trying to change it according to some abstract norms of society. Cheers and have a nice day, man!
What finally challenged my notion of always seperating art from the artist was finding out that Joe Frankulin of Goatlord had killed his neighbor then proceeded to abduct and kill her 8-year old son before killing himself. Yeah... that one's a bit hard for me to set aside and ignore. Pretty much 99% of artists I'm able to separate but It's always possible to have that exception that crosses the line somehow.
@@brimphemus OP says he cant get past it but really what is there to get past? He is dead. Your money is not supporting him anymore. His records where made decades before these murders happened and had nothing to do with it. So what is the problem in this case? The art does not even remotely touch with the later happenings
On the Battle Jacket subreddit people there were getting upset at a Burzum patch that old mate had on his jacket. I told them it's okay people can put whatever on their jacket and it's their right to do so. "Freedom of Speech (Expression)" He called me a Nazi. 😂 I've never met a Polynesian / Samoan Nazi in my life 🤣🧐🙈🙉👀 Great video btw Wyattxhim🤘🏾
when Burzum really started to get hyped up online back in the 2000s it was at a point when Varg didn't have a youtube channel so no one really knew his personal views. everyone knew he was a murderer, but tons of famous rappers have been in gunfights and whatnot so no one really minded.
Even though I do enjoy music made by people like Varg a great deal, I feel there personally is a line for me. I'd say someone like Ian Watkins crosses it. Amazing video by the way!
Great video! You've exhausted the topic. I believe that art is part of the artist and the artist is part of his art. That's why art cannot be completely separated from the artists. Bad people can create beauty. At the end of the day, everyone has their own sense of morality.
It's always been more about the music for me when it comes to what artists I enjoy. I don't pay all that much attention to the lyrics. That's just me, some are the other way around, it's all about the lyrics and how they make you feel. For me, metal envokes emotion virtually purley from the music, so I can ignore the ideologies that may be coming through the lyrics. I do pay attention to the aesthetic of the bands though, and I find myself intrigued by overtly controversial imagery but rarely drawn to them to become an actual fan. So I myself can seperate art from the artist under most circumstances, but it's certainly not black and white
The artist is going to always be in some way reflected in the art they make. If knowing background on an artist recontextualizes their lyrics or message it's fair to say that it can make listening unenjoyable. The message or ethos of an album can be as important to whether you enjoy it as the music itself (especially something like black metal). I think contextualizing the art with the artist is a better way of putting it than trying to erase all traces the creator who's spirit it reflects.
I also like challenging people and myself as well as a musician reversing that question. And I mean discussing about separating the artist from their arts as well. Because it's not even true that a piece of art could or should match the artist's Weltanschauung. If the art is meant as an act of trance or catharsis, then there may be a "spiritual" gap between the person and the art itself. Of course except the cases where the art is a very political act to express the more mundane artist point of views, nothing again that. But again not only it's possible to create that distance, but also there are even cases where the artist goes "against" himself purposely, projecting a different self in his own opus (again also as a cathartic act). You can be the most peaceful guy on earth and making the most violent form of brutal death metal and the other way around, so really a piece of art can tell something about the artist but it may just be a piece of a way more complex puzzle. I often think of Lynch being into trascendental meditation and at the same time producing the most psychedelic, violent and fucked up shit imaginable. Or Corpsegrinder singing about rape, murder and torture and literally being at the same time the most non aggressive down to earth guy possible.
Great video, Wyatt. As someone who's been obsessed with Sanguisugabogg lately, I'm just here to throw my two cents in the ring here and say that the new album is miles ahead of their first full length. I also like their EP more than that album as well. I think it has less to do with the timing of interviews and more to do with the fact his vocal style changed for that one album, which apparently even the dude himself isn't happy with anymore. Also, Kurt Ballou producing the new one doesn't hurt at all. I'm sure the band's politics are a selling point to some, but I'm personally just really into the new wave of "hardcore kids playing death metal" like these guys and 200 Stab Wounds. It's a much more accurate blend of the two genres than deathcore was (although there's definitely a place for that in my music library as well!).
Sorry but it’s the same thing in terms of how it’s written . Again for people jump ship that hard on a band through just one album (especially one that is apart of the hardcore kids playing death metal crowd) is something that doesn’t fly with me. I do believe in falls in the category of what said if a good person makes “bad” music to the audience it’ll attract them. I don’t think they’re doing anything terrible in the standards musically for brutal death metal but the positive attention they got after what the vocalist thinks politically is something that alines with what I’m saying.
@@wyattxhim I'm sure they received a critical push after that, not disputing you in that regard. It's quite possible that the reason I started listening to them (after continually hearing their name mentioned everywhere) is a direct result of that critical push, actually. I was just saying from the standpoint of a listener, Tortured Whole is a definite outlier in the discography (not in a good way), and definitely the album I'm least likely to throw on. The new one is among my favorites of the year, though. The vocal style is truly what makes them different to my ears, not necessarily the writing or musical aspects.
As someone who knew nothing about the people behind the band (until I watched this video), I can say that I found their previous stuff pretty boring and uninteresting and with a horrible snare sound (I only really checked them out because of the Troma music videos), the new album is an insane glow-up. The guitar sound is so dense and thick, the snare sound is tight and punchy while still having a certain rawness to it, and the songs themselves are much more interesting, some really fun riffs which feel a bit more atmospheric and some crazy drum fills. Feels like a bit of Meshuggah influence in the way they’ll find a weird groove and ride it out for a bit. Obviously this is just my opinion, but I imagine most reviewers are just hearing a much more interesting, confident and better-sounding album like I am.
Personally I separate the art from artist sometimes with bands such as Satanic Warmaster (one of my favourite bands) , Nokturnal Mortum and Drowning the Light and so on. I usually start to draw a line at bands like Absurd as the members killed a 15 year old classmate of theirs which is horrible. so I’m pretty much fair game on most bands unless they’ve done something like Absurd.
I find it silly that in metal these things are such a big deal when there are numerous rap artists with connections and support to organized crime but no one gives a shit even in mainstream media. Its just something that "goes with rap"
Organized crime does not kill just criminals. They sell fake drugs that kill people from different ages. They shoot people and also kill bystanders. They are involved sex trafficking. So much for your higher moral
For me it comes down to the difference between "listen" and "support". and that's where I draw the line - especially when it comes to politics. There is a major problem with the alt-right in black metal (or metal subculture in general) and I'm fine with being challenged in music and art, but not financial support or clout. Example - I love MGLA, Exercises in Futility and Age of Excuse are absolute bangers. Doesn't change the fact I've never paid for one of their albums and would never recommend them to someone curious about Black Metal (though I'd theoretically recommend their albums to someone deeper in the BM scene, with caveats). I do believe it's possible t separate art from artist, though not completely. But can you separate artist from not their beliefs, but their activism? The greater aggregate harm they cause? That's where things get messy, and given I'm in a segment of the population that would be the first offed, I just don't play that game. I don't have the patience. TLDR - Listen, yes. Support or buy albums and merch, no.
exactly bro, you said everything, ppl say we are pussies but really we just stand up for what we believe in. quite the opposite of being a pussy we dont stop ourselves from listening to any bands because were so "sensitive" we just try to not give them more power, visibility and reach than they should have. its so easy to pirate music at the end of the day i DETEST that black metal is a safe space for this bullshit ideology, i know it makes sense what with the genre always being hateful and elitist.. but this sucks. im brazillian so i do have stronf feelings about this as well, i also fuckin love brazils extreme metal scene so for a great black/death/sometimes bordering on war metal and melodeath band id recommend you listen to the great Mystifier if you havent. the guy behind it is a "black supremacist" rather than a white one which i find hilarious, in a good way
alt-right.. LOL! there is no alt-right in black metal. There are certainly reactionaries, eco-fascists, survivalists, pure and simple racialists, yes it does exist. But, alt-right types LOOOOL! You are so American-centric. In Europe, being on the right is not incompatible with ecology and there is even an anti-capitalist right, things that can be found in Black Metal. This is one reason why left-wing Americans don't understand the right-wing tendencies of Black Metal despite these ecological tendencies. Because for you to be environmentalist or anti-Christian is to be progressive. This is not the case in Europe. Black Metal has been a romantic and reactionary movement since day one and will always be a more right wing culture. One thing you have difficulty understanding in the USA
Nice video and well spoken! Now, I wanna give my piece on this topic, but I think it's gonna be a bit too long, so read it or don't, all's good! For me, when we usually speak of forms of art from any era I tend to favor the "opera aperta" philosophy of judging art (check out Umberto Eco and Roland Barthes for this), where we consider the artist "dead" and the work of art as a living, breathing, independent entity that allows for interaction and mutation, outside of the artist's feelings or preferences. But the question will be if I use this all of the time, when watching a film, studying a painting or listening to music? No, and here is why. I wanna divide art into transgressive and non-transgressive art, based on a couple of theories by the aesthetician Anthony Julius (who I heard was funnily also Princess Diana's lawyer). He says art can be transgressive on three accounts (separately or some/all at the same time, it depends): it can be 1. formally transgressive (i.e. the artist violates certain artistic norms to create something new and to innovate), 2. morally transgressive (playing with general social moral taboos), 3. politically transgressive (bordering on propaganda). For example, Black Sabbath is a formally transgressive band because it creates something new, negating what heavy rock was before them, thus creating heavy metal (it can also be morally transgressive due to their themes of occultism and Satanism), Venom are a morally transgressive band because they go against Christian values, i.e. the normality of the Western moral taboo (and also can be a formally transgressive band, being the fastest and harshest metal band at their time), and Peste Noire are a politically transgressive band, on the account of their extreme Right-Wing values expressed in their music (and also could be a formally transgressive band, because it's black metal which last time I checked is not disco). You get the point. This is a symptom of modern arts, beginning with the middle of the 19th century and still is the "norm" today. For more info, check out Anthony Julius. Now, if I am listening to a Dua Lipa song or watching "Taxi Driver", it's kinda hard for me to go off of other norms other than the artistic ones, because the work of art can express itself autonomously and because these works are not transgressive, bordering on being mass culture actually ("Taxi Driver" ain't quite "Holy Mountain" by Jadorowsky or "Eraserhead" by Lynch, you get me?). Why? Because these works are a product of a collective of people and the personalities of the artists don't really matter in the judging of the music/film. But when I listen to transgressive music, I tend to have a more ideological approach. Formally transgressive art I am fine with it in principle 99.9% of the time, so I will skip this, but when consuming morally or politically transgressive stuff, it just depends on my moral and political values. I identify myself as a progressive and Left-Wing kinda guy, so guess with what bands I fuck with or not morally and politically. But I base these ideological judgements (that everybody has) on the form of art, not the artist (mostly). If your music is about fighting against wars, Satanism and agriculture (let's say) but you are a problematic artist, I will stream your songs on Spotify because they are not about those problematic features of yours (and because you also make no money off of Spotify), but I won't go to your concert or buy merch. Now, if you are a monster and your art is not a masterpiece in it's genre, then yeah, I can live without it - life's too short and there's too much art to consume. There is also another issue at hand: "what if the art is about the artist themselves"? Well, then yes, I won't separate the art from the artist because the piece of art is filled to the brim with the artist's depiction of themselves. Also think of rap music (which I love) where the essence of it is being true and displaying yourself through the bars that you rap. Also, this applies to punk. But yeah, if the art piece is autobiographical in nature, then if you're a horrible cunt, ain't listening to it. That's the only case where I 100% don't separate them. But other than that, as Wyatt said, I'm not talking about wanting to be friends with Varg and going for a beer, I am talking about Burzum, because the music is not morally or politically transgressive in any shape or form. Maybe a bit morally, because it's dark and Pagan, blah blah blah, but nothing I don't like about it. Also, someone saying that Burzum's music is in itself offensive, I'd say they're truly wrong. So, because aesthetically the first couple of Burzum records are giants and landmarks in their field and because I like them and because they are not morally or politically transgressive works of art (and they don't violate my moral and political codes), then I will listen to Burzum. But Varg? May he rot in Hell. Also, I am morally and politically open-minded, so I give mostly anything a try and I don't consider to have the facts about the nature of the world or shit like that. I might be wrong in anything I do and believe in, so I am skeptical of myself and of the world as a way of life. I am not the kinda guy to hate on Deathspell Omega because allegedly Aspa is their guest vocalist and all the mediocre woke stuff you find online. You get the point... As a song from Propagandhi says, "life's too short to make other's shorter". So yeah, I am of the school of separating the art from the artist mostly, but there are some exceptions. I have moral and political motivations of rejecting art, but only if the art is moral or political in nature. If a conservative dude makes a thrash song about drinking beer or a conservative girl makes a song about falling in love, why should I judge them on my and their politics and morals? I judge them on their aesthetics because that's what the work of art asks of me. And if a LGBTQIA+ ally writes a boring song about being sad, then I won't fuck with it just because we share the same values and ideologies. But I do have a strong bond with a band like Discharge or Crass, or Public Enemy and a rapper like Nas, because we share moral and political values + the music is dope. These are my two cents on the matter, sorry for the long post (I have a Bachelor's in philosophy and I am currently completing my Master's in this crap... sorry). Maybe it helped somebody or maybe it has a contribution to the discourse and if not, hey, it's all in good spirit and we had a laugh. Cheers if you read my bullshit long comment! Love your shit, Wyatt!
I've always kind of chosen finances as the place to draw the line, in terms of enjoying good art by bad people. Of course this only applies to people who are still alive (if the artist is dead there's no way they can benefit from my enjoyment of their music regardless of who they were). Basically if I genuinely like art by a person I can't stand, I'll find a way to partake in that art without paying the artist for it. When it comes to music that usually manifests as buying used CDs. When it comes to the "good person, bad art" question - which I do think is a good question - I don't think the Sanguisugabogg example works, because their music wasn't rejected because of the lyrical content or messaging behind it, it was rejected just for being by-the-numbers and not breaking any molds. It's not morally bad art, it's mediocre art. I hadn't heard of them before this video, but I am going to give them a listen and may very well buy an album, even though brutal death metal isn't really my thing, and I'm happy to explain why. In extreme music in particular, as you rightly pointed out, the scene is about expressing extreme emotions. What those emotions are differ from genre to genre and even from band to band, but this is why it's possible for both violent white supremacists and antifa anarchist types to enjoy the same sound, even if they don't enjoy the same lyrics. Put simply, they've both got something to scream about. That's something I've known since I first dipped my toes in the scene. I know by wading into metal (and esp black metal) I'm running the risk of interacting with musicians and fans who I would consider to be deeply unsavory and even dangerous people. That being said, if I am given the choice between a nazi band or a progressive one, I will choose the progressive one. Why? Because I am of a marginalized group that the nazi bands would happily wipe out, or at least are comfortable expressing violent sentiments towards. If a band makes a point of being progressive, and ESPECIALLY if they make a point of wanting to be safe for people like me, that's a breath of fresh air in a scene where I'm normally wearing a gas mask for my own protection. I don't think anyone has to support Sanguisugabogg for being progressive, and I think if you're not in a marginalized group it's pretty easy to just roll your eyes at their vocal support of minorities and move on with your day. But for those of us who spend every show nervously wondering if someone's going to jump us just for being visibly different (ie not white, not straight, not a man, etc), there is a lot of appeal in a band that is willing to make room for us. They may not break any molds and brutal death metal might not be my usual style, but I'll happily throw a tip to a band that sees me and openly wants me there. I think a better example of "good person, bad art" would be genres like RABM, since there are plenty of people in the metal scene who don't jive with progressive and especially hard left politics. And when it comes to that, all I can ask someone is; why do you think it's bad art? Is the music itself actually bad quality or are you just uncomfortable with what the song is about? Why do you consider NSBM to be enjoyable enough to be forgiven, despite the lyrical content, but you can't stand RABM? If you don't identify with either political group, why are you willing to overlook politics for one genre but not the other? I ask this because I often see people spitting on RABM for being "too political" and arguing that art shouldn't have politics in it, but NSBM is obviously political and a lot of metalheads will happily defend their right to enjoy it as art while ignoring the politics. Basically, I do see people discussing the "good people, bad art" question, it's just that the conclusions they seem to come to is because they consider the art to be "too political," they refuse to give it the time of day, while happily giving leeway to the "bad people, good art" question. (Hope it's obvious in that last section that I'm using the general "you") Obviously both musical taste and morality are entirely personal and I what I consider quality art or morally good art will differ greatly from anyone else's. But that's my two cents.
That's interesting re: Sanguisagabog cos I noticed a few people slagging them off cos one of them is in some other band that has massively sexist/violent lyrics (basically just Cannibal Corpse type stuff). And I will just add, their second album is a bit of a step up in terms of sound and composition imo. Another ace video, man. You're a good soul!
The way I see it, the purpose of music and art in general is to be enjoyed. If you don't enjoy it, then you don't enjoy it and it's a valid opinion to have, but it doesn't mean others can't or shouldn't. I think it should just be left at that, and anything the artist says or does is completely separate to whether or not you enjoy their work.
I’m an down to earth modern leftist and being a long time black metal fan I didn’t have too many struggles listening to a band like Burzum, though as my political knowledge and understanding grew I could see the bad authors, or ideas, and even histories coming out of Vargs mouth. It was no longer simply repulsive by instinct or what were taught, it was ignorant and I could see where and how his ignorance operates. I don’t know if I have more or less pity toward him to be honest, it’s kind of confusing. But I did talk to Varg on Twitter awhile back and I flatly explained to him that I don’t support his politics, nor do I even support his paganism and what I described as a through line to his racism, I told him paganism has no relation to me and it’s boring, and his response was totally normal and fine. He liked my comment of me saying I don’t agree with him, but he also liked my comment saying I could separate the art from the artist, so he is aware that a leftist like myself can hate his guts for his views, but I put that aside because honestly I love the music. I think in a way Varg knows a lot of people hate his ideas yet he lets a lot of it slide if they’re just their for the music, I dunno he just came across to me as self aware and aware of that weird dynamic of the art and artist.
Maybe I’m being pedantic about word choice, but I’ve always thought that “separating” the art from the artist is simply impossible. You can’t just “turn off” knowledge of an artist’s actions, and they will always influence your experience of the music, even if it’s in an unconscious way. We’re human beings not robots
You just contradicted your own point. Just because some people get infuenced in an unconscious way, doesn't mean everyone is. Because we are different individual beings not robots. I literally could not give a single fuck about operation mindcrime being super pro socialism-communism or carelian satanist madness that is literally a NSBM album. I love both of these albums. In my top 10
I generally try to separate the two when it comes to enjoying the music, financial support or wearing merch (even for free hypothetically) is something I am not comfortable with though. It also depends on if any of the personal ideas or experiences of the artist are reflected in the music. It is complicated with a lot of grey areas though and ultimately I just do what feels right. I used to really enjoy Inquisition, even saw them live, but after the allegations came out I found myself listening to them a lot less. I guess it is also easier to separate such things from the music when you already know about it going in versus it only becoming apparant after you’ve formed a ‘connection’ to the music.
The question isn't can we separate the art from the artist, it's how we police artists and people who enjoy the art that was created. The answer is really simple, it's all taste. We all have inclinations to associate with whoever we want, but we have no right to tell people what they can enjoy and judge others for being a bad person because they listen to an R. Kelly song or a Daughters song. I also want to point out that there is nothing wrong with pointing the bad things an artist does to someone who's a fan (there's a good chance the fan probably already knows, anyway, and probably let it process in their heads). It becomes an issue when you bully people over it, nobody knowshow to have a civil disagreement anymore, it just becomes explosive.
Very insightful and well done, Wyatt. I agree with you, there is a breaking point. Mine is Bertrand Cantat, I just can't and won't listen to Noir Desir anymore. Burzum, I could repeat your words one by one. Also I think that having politically correct viewpoints doesn't automatically make your art great, if your music sucks it sucks, no matter your stance.
Exactly why I’m not really a fan of Feminazgul or Absurd. Both bands put their messages first and music second, and it really shows. Even if I agree with Feminazgul’s lyrics, the instrumental execution is so messy and distracting that I can’t really listen to it.
It doesn’t matter how hard I try - my mind simply doesn’t care what an artist has done in their personal life. I am physically unable to fail to enjoy someone’s music due to their actions
Fair enough I did say their are no wrong answers here and we all have our own views and i respect you for sharing. I guess all I can ask is you is while “bad actions” by artists don’t effect your views on art then does a person’s “good actions “ (stuff you personally agree with them) effect you to enjoy the music more than before?
@@wyattxhim Nah mate got way more important shit in the real world to worry about. [edit] You can tell how this answer seperates teh Americans from the British.
@@NeroAngelo616 you’re really annoying. All your comments are basically “Who cares” “Better things to do than worry” Yet you’re bombarding the comments on this subject.
my take is especially with peste noire for example is that i dont want the guy to make any money, so if i come across any songs of his that i like (which is so far 0 except the one with neige) i will pirate it. one of the things ive seen about the new harry potter game was that "you supporting a dead artists IP's isnt problematic but if the said artist is still alive and youre directly supporting their wallets you're a part of the problem" because at that point youre financially giving them the freedom to spread their hatred to the public.
I have several thoughts: 1. While it is up to the individual to separate the artist from the art, the individual will also let outside sources (ie music communities, friends, other fans) cloud their judgement on the artist. 2. The reasonings behind a lot of the separatings end up showing the hypocrisy of the one separating art and artist ( take BM. They'll bash the artist not because of the church burnings and anti-Christian lyrics, but instead when they write lyrics that are anti-other Abrahamic monotheist religions). 3. Similarly, as you stated, they end up rating objectively bad music highly due to either the musicians or the album's message. Usually when it's a person who is sad and can't sing well, and also discovering they're gay. 4. The other art/artist separation that wasn't mentioned, is an art piece (be it album, movie, or whatever) vs artist as a brand. Cause there's some pieces that get ranked higher or lower due to the name attached to the piece.
As someone who enjoys a massively wide range of music I find a lot of my favorite artists end up being either weirdos or on the complete opposite end of the political spectrum than I, but that’s what makes the world go round and what makes different people tick in their own way. Sincerely, a GG Allin fan
I think people should at least try (if this stuff bothers them) the earlier KPN stuff is really good. Goatmoon is amazing as well. There are lots of great bands that have what people would look at as troubling politics. The thing is that most artists are lunatics with crazy views, it seems silly to me to cut yourself off from amazing art because of this. The chances are they partake in art by some right creeps, they just don't know that they are creeps. Honestly, that world is fully of debauchery, I think it's pretty much impossible to only partake in art that is completely morally, correct.
At the end of the day, it’s up to the individual and being aware. The Growlers (psych surf rock) broke up a couple years ago bc of sexual harassment allegations. I still listen to them, sometimes it actively bothers me, sometimes I detach from it, but I’ll own I still listen to it. I can’t get mad if someone thinks that’s fucked up. I dunno them, maybe they were harassed or assault by the band or otherwise and their opinion is informed by that trauma. No bone in my body has the desire to downplay that or get pissy that someone thinks less of me because of it. I have my own lines that I wont cross for personal reasons as well, surely many people would think they’re ridiculous. I don’t need to have a 45 comment reddit or fb fight about it, they’re allowed to think whatever they want. As for sanguisabogg (sp), I understand why people would gravitate towards a band that has similar morals, especially in re: to transgender individuals. if you’re targeted as often as that community is, you’re probably not gonna be too bothered that the music is kinda mid when a band comes out in vocal support of you (especially in a scene that, correct or not, gets a misogynistic reputation). Surely I’m not alone in saying a lot more comes into choosing my favorite bands than just music (image, ideology, etc…). You can say that’s dumb but I doubt so many of us would love death metal if the aesthetics, content and DIY background never existed. There’s people that listen to NSBM bc its NS, not bc it’s good black metal lol, don’t let them tell you that liking a band bc you feel seen by them is wrong or bad.
I somehow do not have any bad gutfeeling hearing Burzum stuff, but get really bad gutwrenches if I see an Absurd album. Especially after diving into some of this Sandro Beyer stuff.
for me theres a difference between enjoying the music and actually supporting the artist like buying merch and giving them streams. like i absolutely love crystal castles music and still listen to it but im not going to support ethan financially so i just have it downloaded
I think a couple points that tend to get ignored are to do with what the money you would be giving over does. If you have a horrible person who is incredibly passionate about the art that they make, theres a good chance that the money that you give over to them would be going towards more projects instead of their sustainability or quality of life. If you hate the person but believe that there needs to be more art of thiers in the world, do you believe it's immoral to fund it, or thats it's immoral to let it die? Also, what about people that are already rich? If you hated jeff bezos or jk rowling or whoever, does it mean anything to give them money? Neither of them will ever want for money for the rest of their lives, no matter what happens, so are you actively harming anyone by paying them? Of course there's also the topic of piracy, but that's a whole other dimension of questions that just happens to have some crossover here. Im not here to say anything about any of this, because i think that all of this is going to boil down to what any person is comfortable with instead of an obviously true blanket statement like "serial murder is bad". But I think that more people need to ask themselves questions around every crevice of moral issues they care about. In general, most moral arguments always end up becoming catchphrases instead of real discussions and that is something that absolutely needs to change.
The financial support topic is something I’ll admit I forgot to address in this . Like everything I talked about I don’t believe there is a correct answer to it nor do I think what I think and do is the divine right way of doing things. If or when I have bought a Burzum record I think about how most of that money goes to the label that way more records can be made in print . Yes some royalties will go to Varg . What I end up wondering is does my dollar change anything? Especially compared to the thousands of others who buy Burzum records weekly. Should I now consider all of the big brand companies I buy from as just as evil ? It’s one of those things where I think it leads to micromanaging that I just personally can’t do.
Personal preference but how I take it, the art is a representation or result of the person or people, or their values, morals, what have you. Even if the art isn't directly about those values. With that said the only thing that will stop me from listening to an artist is if I feel they're actually an evil person, whether I agree with an artist or not isn't that. I can still admit the music is of good quality (Such as Burzum), I still wouldn't choose to listen to it myself. Maybe it's because I'm an empathetic person or very emotionally connected, I don't know. Completely understand why people would just separate it from the person and call it a day though. Music and art in general is a very personal experience, enjoy what you like as long as you aren't hurting anybody!
People make walls of text on the internet about the same thing justifying their mental gymnastics. Meanwhile I'm listening to said artist as they're getting essays from them being rent free in their heads.
I think it depends on what the artist in question did if the artist involved was the most prolific paedophile and child sex offender in British legal history Ian watkins of lostprophets for example, its a bit hard to separate the art from the artist. Its crossing the line between doing it for shock value (mika aspa of deathspell omega or whitehouse) or in watkins case actually doing it.
you cannot detach the art from the artist as it implies that the art in-itself could have been generically recreated by any other individual, the reality is at the end of the day is if you enjoy a particular band that has negative associations whether that be nsbm, rape allegations, liking the color blue what have that you willing ignore these flaws for your own personal enjoyment and thats just what it is. we all do it in some form.
I recently picked up a black metal album from Kaevum Natur and yeah, they are banned on discogs and subject matter might be a bit sketchy. But I enjoy the raw sound and aggression. I don't agree with what they're saying but because of the music, I keep it and listen to it and enjoy it. Am I a bad person? I don't think so.
I can easily separate the art from the artist as long as there is no hypocrisy between their art and their lives. In other words, Burzum yes, Cosby no.
Even with the Varg situation, it shouldn't be difficult to separate his politics from his music. As far as I know, he never stated his views in his most well known work. Whereas with bands like Arghoslent, it is much less ambiguous and I think it is more fair to want to avoid listening to them even if their riffs are supposedly great. It is much easier for me to listen to Intestine Baalism's riffs and not have the same guilt listening to music with tracks like "Flogging the Cargo".
Dude, Intestine Baalism are an amazing band! If you want the Arghoslent sound without the awful racist lyrics, check out either Grenadier or Bogside Sniper Squadron.
its crazy to me how people are so oversocialized as to feel guilt listening to certain music. its literally impossible for me to imagine how that would feel. is it actually a feeling of guilt like you are doing something morally wrong when you listen to controversial music or is it like a fear of getting thrown out of your social circle if you get found out?
I can't comprehend "feeling guilty" for listening to music. Do you feel guilty when you eat food or drink potable water because people in third world shitholes have none? Do you weep when you put socks on because some people can't afford socks? Do you keep your head bald because people undergoing cancer treatment don't have hair so why should you? Do you avoid brushing your teeth since old people and babies don't even HAVE teeth to brush? Man, that's some wimp city shit. The very definition of a tampon boy.
@@wotanjugend974 I think the combination of the social climate changing and stuff like the 2017 Charlottesville riots and the whole #MeToo movement made a lot of people more aware of the wrongdoings that certain musicians did, but it also made people a lot less nuanced.
Really nice take on "bad music" made by "good artists". The industry tends to push forth any person that aligns with virtue signaling. I dont really care about ideology whent it comes to music, the only time I had to stop and think if the music I was listening to was problematic was when getting to know Deathspell Omega, because of Mikko Aspa other projects dealing with p*do views. I can enjoy their music, I even think a couple of albums are masterpieces, still as art is a form of expression I don't know why someone would express their world views in such a way to be confused with p*do supporters. The shocking value is not enough for me really...
Honestly, my own perspective with separation with art from the artist is simply this: You can enjoy music of a terrible person, _but_ be aware of what reactions people will get. HOWEVER I immediately don't touch a band who's members have done predatory behavior. It's one of the reasons I don't touch Power electronic projects and bands like Woods of Infinity.
I am fairly left-leaning but I enjoy a lot of "problematic" artists, such as Peste Noire, Clandestine Blaze, DsO, et al. I believe criticism has its place in music, but I think trying to take a moral stance regarding art can be difficult. It can be one thing to acknowledge a person is or can be bad, but it's another to outright dismiss their work. I don't have to like these people to enjoy the music.
Honestly, there’s never going to be a “right” answer to this. It’s up to the individual how problematic they find an artist. I do think that people who are quick to say “just separate the two” are in a position where problematic music doesn’t effect them directly, especially if it comes to racist/ nazi artists. But then again who am I to say? I love Deathspell Omega, but they work with Mikko Aspa who has explicitly anti-Semitic lyrics and a song title that translates to “Monkeyhunt”; as I get older, it gives me more pause where my attention and dollar is going. Good vid Wyatt.
Honestly, I don't really care anymore if the artist says this or that, does this or that. It's annoying to pay attention to such things or to justify myself about what I listen to. So my thing is: If like how it sounds, I'll regularly listen to it, and I'll buy it. It's too bothersome to care about what the artist or what the music says and I've been enjoying myself by just not caring about it and listening to what I like.
I sort of have the same opinion that you said that you had long ago except I'll add one more detail: I don't really care. I listen to music for the music, and only very rarely I might care for the artist if it is a really positive thing. For example I mostly listen to the more extreme branches of metal music and my favourite band is (wait for it) Babymetal. The girls are too good not to love them. I'll jump from Babymetal music to Blackened Death metal in a pinch and enjoy them both equally, and I'll care about Babymetal for who they are and how they perform but if one of the guys in the other band is a murderer for example, I don't really care. It doesn't enhance the music in any way obviously that one of the guys is a murderer and it doesn't make it worse because the art itself exists even if the guy was even worse. So I can only link my opinion of music to the artist if the artist has a positive influence for me, if that makes sense. I do believe that a perfectly reasonable argument is, even if you don't agree with it, what if a particular album or song that you really like but was made by a horrible person was made in an alternate universe but the guy making it was a saint. It's the exact same music either way, and I enjoy it as such. Not saying I'm "right" in any way, I'm just trying to explain my opinion. Really good video, it's a really interesting topic. And yeah I don't monetarily support artists who are pieces of shit. Just don't give them money and you won't help them in any way even if you love their art.
