General Discussion

RockRaven

(18,098 posts)

7. There doesn't need to be a hard and fast rule or consistency, imo. If the artist's behavior has

Sun Feb 26, 2023, 02:13 PM

Feb 2023

tainted the experience of their art for you, that's fine. And if it hasn't, that's fine too. And if it sometimes does and sometimes doesn't, that is also fine.

But liking or disliking art/work-product is something I would separate from financially supporting a bad actor. If someone is actively harming others, continuing to give them money (directly or indirectly) just because one likes their art/work is not appropriate. People harming others should be shunned not enabled, even if that means we must forego some selfish pleasures.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

9 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Adams has clarified something for me that I've long been uncertain about. [View all] LAS14 Feb 2023 OP

I can't support it EYESORE 9001 Feb 2023 #1

I agree... agingdem Feb 2023 #6

As one principle, I think it's a good start. cos dem Feb 2023 #2

I kind of do both. A lot of artists are very eccentric. Just leftyladyfrommo Feb 2023 #3

I liked his comic strip but not his personal views. TheCowsCameHome Feb 2023 #4

It's interesting you mention Wagner Xavier Breath Feb 2023 #5

There doesn't need to be a hard and fast rule or consistency, imo. If the artist's behavior has RockRaven Feb 2023 #7

I'm torn... AZSkiffyGeek Feb 2023 #8

Dilbert creator, Scott Adams, has decided to release his racist feelings. LetMyPeopleVote Feb 2023 #9