Art and the Artist
 

I thought this may be of interest. Raises some good questions:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6979731.stm

A respected music teacher who wrote music teaching books for children was recently jailed for four years as a paedophile. One of his victims is asking for his books to be banned. Music teachers consider his books for recorder to be amongst the best music books ever written for children.

So...should the books be banned? Do we separate the artist from his work?

Depends on the art. It's not like he was drawing illustrations of children, or writing stories about their fond relationships with their adult mentors. It's sheet music, for crying out loud. (Are the songs titled "Ode to a Little Boy?")

Now is the time when his work should continue to be sold, and the proceeds used to help compensate the victims.

:lol: LoL, that's probably the best thing I've heard all day.

I was going to say, it's a slam-dunk ... separate the art from the artist. If he wrote the best children's music books ever, let them stand on their own merits, and benefit his victims.

Then I thought about how I reacted when Woody Allen took up with his underage step-daughter; I didn't want to see his movies anymore, I was so disgusted. So I'm not consistent.

Somehow the music book issue seems clearer. Maybe because you wouldn't (presumably) have to look at the guy the entire time you're using the book?

But with Woody Allen, he is a celebrity, and part of show business is to sell that persona. He is tainted goods.

In this case, the sheet music speaks for itself, and I would never even consider the persona of the author.

*nods* I agree glatt. I understand the victim's point of view on this, but it would also be unfair, I think, to deprive other kids of such good materials and would serve no useful purpose.

Agreed, Woody Allen is not a good comparison. Shame on those who still work with him.