Can a work of art be separated from its creator? The question that has engaged some of the greatest philosophers is soon to engage a Channel 4 studio audience in Britain, which is to be presented with works by such artists as Adolf Hitler, Eric Gill and Rolf Harris. Decisions are to be mediated by Jimmy Carr via a hammer.
Before discussing the TV show, over which much outrage has been generated, one theory is worth advancing: You can quite easily separate art from its creator — as long as the art is bad. Hitler’s postcard watercolors are perfectly safe to consume as there is nothing of him in them. They might have been created by any number of sentimental daubers who failed (twice) to get into art school.
When art is good, though, the artist has transferred some of their soul into it. They cannot help but reveal themselves. Gill’s stuff is very dangerous.
Illustration: Mountain People
So it is with any number of great, but corrupt artists. Paul Gauguin was a pedophile who took underage Tahitian girls as his sex slaves; his paintings invite the viewer to join him in gazing lustfully at these same teenagers, naked and in sexualized poses.
Caravaggio, genius and murderer, produced art that makes violence beautiful. His bright spurts of blood and clear fascination with the expression on a dying face give you a taste of what it might be like to want to kill someone. He converts his audience into, at the very least, morbid rubberneckers.
Salvador Dali’s raging narcissism and cruelty to animals and people is imprinted deeply on his art. His famous short film Un Chien Andalou, written with Luis Bunuel, shows a closeup of a woman’s eye being slit open with a razor and invites the viewer to enjoy the spectacle. It is an act of persuasion.
This is inevitable. What separates good art from bad is that good artists say what they really mean. When people talk about genius they are not describing technical skill or the labor of construction, block by block. They mean something more like inspiration: a dart of instinct straight from the soul onto the canvas.
The darkest urges of a great artist will, of course, echo in their art, and the self-justifications of the criminal or pervert — that everyone secretly shares their tendencies — is channeled through their works. Great art is great because it has the power to corrupt, should that be the artist’s wish. It is dangerous.
Bad art, on the other hand, is very safe. It thoroughly obscures the soul of the artist — nothing is revealed at all. A thick layer of plexiglass cliche lies between the soul of the artist and the viewer so that no darkness can seep through.
This insulating property is so integral to the genre that it has often been put to a practical purpose: Fascists tend to promote and surround themselves with bad art, now known as “totalitarian kitsch,” because it helps disguise them from themselves. There are tales of brutal dictators weeping at sentimental films after a hard day’s genocide.
This throws up a bit of a problem for modern moralists, not to mention gallery curators. Current sensibilities demand that artistic heroes be good people too: Seeming to endorse the “problematic” ones, even by discussing them, appears newly risky. This explains some of the outraged reaction to Channel 4’s show Jimmy Carr Destroys Art, which might have delighted audiences in the 1980s and 1990s.
People have also been brought up on the idea that all great art should be revered. That explains the other half of the outrage to the show.
Witness the outcry after a pair of climate change protesters threw soup on the protective glass surrounding a Van Gogh painting last week. The picture was unharmed, but the justifiably mocking, negative reaction said more about the ridiculous, self-important stunt than anything else.
So how should great art by bad people be dealt with? The solution that people have tended to reach for in the past few years is that art is essentially “harmless.” The artwork of corrupt people can be consumed and it will not touch us.
That accompanies a similar modern urge to see all great art and literature as “improving.” Judges have taken to prescribing criminals reading lists, as if all books, from Lolita to The Picture of Dorian Gray, were written with the express purpose of turning us into law-abiding citizens.
However, this does art a disservice. To treat art as harmless is to fail to take it seriously and reduce it to mere decoration.
If one wants to argue that some art can be good for us, one needs to consider that some can also be bad for us. How should immoral art be dealt with? It is still a question worth grappling with.
Martha Gill is a political journalist and former lobby correspondent.
Congratulations to China’s working class — they have officially entered the “Livestock Feed 2.0” era. While others are still researching how to achieve healthy and balanced diets, China has already evolved to the point where it does not matter whether you are actually eating food, as long as you can swallow it. There is no need for cooking, chewing or making decisions — just tear open a package, add some hot water and in a short three minutes you have something that can keep you alive for at least another six hours. This is not science fiction — it is reality.
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
The war between Israel and Iran offers far-reaching strategic lessons, not only for the Middle East, but also for East Asia, particularly Taiwan. As tensions rise across both regions, the behavior of global powers, especially the US under the US President Donald Trump, signals how alliances, deterrence and rapid military mobilization could shape the outcomes of future conflicts. For Taiwan, facing increasing pressure and aggression from China, these lessons are both urgent and actionable. One of the most notable features of the Israel-Iran war was the prompt and decisive intervention of the US. Although the Trump administration is often portrayed as
Czech military intelligence last week revealed that Chinese diplomats and intelligence officers followed Vice President Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) and allegedly planned to stage an incident during her visit to Prague last year. In March last year, Czech media reported that a Chinese diplomat ran a red light while tailing Hsiao’s car. A Czech public radio news Web site reported on Thursday that Chinese officials also had plans to stage a car crash, a claim later confirmed by Czech military intelligence. The radio report cited a Czech Military Intelligence spokesperson who described the incident as “a case of physically following, to the point
RSS