Dr. Rebecca Marks
Region: GB
Thursday 14 August 2025 06:27:03 GMT
79485
6545
90
164
Music
Download
Comments
russjones :
Is it only guys that have historically fallen in to this weird space of great art, bad human?
2025-08-14 10:31:50
3
Frenchie 🇵🇸🇨🇩🇸🇩 :
Don’t bother with Monsters- it completely misses the mark and seems to suggest there’s some equivalence between people struggling with addiction who only ever hurt themselves and those who do so much harm to others or even wider society. Dederer provides no answers or guidance at all.
2025-08-16 22:23:45
12
Mads :
My brother suggested things get recredited to a “John Doe”. Royalties accrued go to either charity or the public. I don’t think it’s a bad idea!
2025-08-14 12:52:59
169
dudeglove :
Jon Berger's Ways of Seeing is available to watch on youtube and should be mandatory viewing because it's still relevant
2025-08-14 09:14:04
134
Jeremy Simon :
My personal take: I studied classical piano and loved Beethoven… until I read his biography. It changed how the music made me feel.
2025-08-14 16:25:10
26
Fionnbharr Rodgers :
I read that book. Unimpressed. ‘The Genius Myth’ by Helen Lewis was closer to the mark.
2025-08-15 00:38:10
31
jauntyangle :
I'd look at it as a set of scales. The quality of the art on one scale, the heinousness of the "crimes" on the other. Some art is so good you can overlook some transgressions. Some acts are so bad you can't.
2025-08-14 18:32:53
9
alexandra.visual.art :
This is (in part) my research for my PhD
2025-10-11 09:56:55
3
leah :
i liked monsters because dederer doesn’t answer the question for you, like so many people want. it really is down to personal opinion and what you personally will overlook for the sake of art
2025-08-14 13:59:50
28
rogueinsider :
Moralizing is tedious because it's so simple, great art is intriguing because it is so complex. Therefore moralizing is itself a poor art form.
2025-08-16 19:17:18
3
arabella shaw :
I think it depends. is artist still benefiting from said art ? like, Neil Gaiman used to be my favorite author. I will not throw away the book I already bought and have at home. It serves nothing. but I will never buy another book from him. because that would be me founding him.
2025-09-03 14:59:41
17
Curtis Weyant | Author 📚🖋️📒 :
Choosing Wilde is very meta lol
2025-08-14 20:50:49
5
Matt Clarke 🧐🇻🇦 :
I really want to read that Oscar Wilde book. It's already on my wishlist.
2025-10-11 20:43:59
1
George Currie538 :
Art is always a projection of the artist’s feelings thoughts and personality (hidden or otherwise). People will transfer their own emotions and experiences when viewing art which is why one person’s messy bedroom is another’s great work! If the viewer understood that the artist was a horrific individual before viewing the art would they still hold the same opinion as someone who didn’t know the history? Art, I would argue, is contextual too!
2025-08-14 09:57:12
30
Dana :
I hate that I love Gauguin- but he is dead
2025-08-14 10:18:17
11
DarkCuriosity :
I believe the great art has an element that comes from deeper level than personal. In a way these people are messengers. Maybe lack of empathy or other factors allow this message to move through more freely. In a way art is not of them and doesn’t belong to them. But of course it’s a complex issue.
2025-09-07 08:39:09
3
anaelisam04 :
i think often discourse around this topic is conflicted with discussons about ethical consumption, specially HP (which i think has its own specifities), and the two intertwine but are not the same
2025-09-04 05:14:16
2
sophie 🧚🏼♀️ :
i really enjoyed the book monsters! especially how she basically concludes there is no one correct answer to this question (which does explain why people have so much to say on it)
2025-08-14 10:49:08
5
nitemareodyssey :
one of the ironies of eric gill is that one of his more famous works (the typeface gill sans) is used by the church of england across its liturgical texts. oops…
2025-10-18 07:25:08
1
Lucifer🍒🏠🐇💐 :
I cant find ur video
2025-08-17 02:08:08
0
Britt :
Maybe Art's morality (or the morality of the artist) wouldn't be so important if we weren't living under capitalism? Maybe the two can never really be separated. But when enjoying the art is mostly tied to fiscally supporting the artist ... enjoying takes on a new political meaning? If the art was fab and random and not commodified ... it could just be enjoyed?
2025-08-18 13:29:21
3
_pandora088 :
You can only separate the person from their art if that person is dead
2025-09-28 22:49:08
1
Cooper :
I was reading Charlotte Perkins Gilman. it was only afterwards I found out she was a white supremacist and eugenist. I normally check beforehand but for some reason I hadn't with her otherwise I wouldn't have read her work
2025-08-14 15:22:30
4
aduckfromanaress :
Great video! Just a thought, it would be great if you could mirror your videos before posting so that we can read the book titles easier (many booktokers don't do this). Thanks!
2025-08-15 03:46:55
0
thebookishgirlie⚔️📚❤️🔥 :
THIS! I’ve been thinking about this a lot lately as I consume on the internet as a scholar as well. I need to take some time and sit down and write out my thoughts. What pops into my mind first is horrible people have always made great art and that’s another subject to explore. We as a species have always celebrated art that has been made by problematic people. I think as we’ve grown and become more accepting we are able to point out the problematic nature of lifestyle, choices and bad ideology these artists have held. I’m not sure that diminishes the art though. Some of the most impactful art on me has been problematic and it’s the fact that it’s problematic for me that makes it impactful. When I read a really racist narrative I’m normally quite moved not for the racist but because I’m able to empathize for the people who underwent that experience and who have fought tirelessly to gain freedom. I can also recognize that the writing is beautiful or the story impactful without allowing the author/artists beliefs to totally shift mine. Most of the time it makes me stand stronger in my beliefs. I think in today’s day an age with the rise of anti-intellectualism and the loss of critical thinking and nuance we have become so declarative. We are adopting binary and black and white thinking to an almost detrimental degree. It must be either or and there is no space for if and. Now given we are living in late stage capitalism and art has become an industry that fuels capitalism the subject becomes more complex. We have artists that have turned into these juggernauts and now have real power to cause widespread and great harm in a different materiel way than before. Though the other side of the argument holds that problematic artists were causing harm before as well perhaps we just weren’t as aware of it. I don’t have an answer to this question and I think that’s part of why it’s a moral and ethical debate because we won’t have just one right answer which will really upset the binary black and white thinkers. I do think art and life is more complex than that though. I’m planning on reading monsters next year and I’m so excited.
2025-10-05 19:17:46
1
To see more videos from user @theculturedump, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
