is a user on glitch.social. You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse.
A person's personal life does not immediately invalidate their work.
For example. Let's say the accusations about Leonardo Davinci's predilections for corpses were true... they aren't but let's say they were.
Would that devalue the Mona Lisa?
Humans are monsters, each and every one of us.
Occassionally we still make art despite that
@elomatreb
@TheGibson But art (or anything we create) cannot be truly understood detached from its creator either
@TheGibson (IMO the concept of "value of art" is flawed anyway, but that's a different topic).
It doesn't have to be negative, which seems to be the dominant assumption. If you'd show someone a Pollock painting without them knowing the history of it all it won't appear any more valuable than someone knocking over a paint bucket
@elomatreb @thegibson That is precisely the problem I have with the art buying market: *who* made the art is usually far more important than anything about the art itself.
@elomatreb @TheGibson I disagree completely. My enjoyment of a song and the meaning I find in it is between me and the song and my associations with it. The creator might have some opinion. I might not even know about it. I might learn about it and reject it. It's a historical curiosity. Relevant to 'how art is made', perhaps. (Or at least self-reported experience/thoughts of people making art) but rather irrelevant to any individual's appreciation of the art and how they share it.
@elomatreb
I do not agree.
Art's value is in the perceptor's mind.