Thread of the Cancellèd - The Bear and Badger

Kow

There'd be no music left if you can't separate them. The Blues would, like, completely vanish.

mistercrayon

Everyone seems to be saying Jackson was okay the other day.

poprock

nick_md wrote:

I've decided to separate art from artist, sometimes with a few exceptions, for legacy work. I think I'd feel less inclined to accept new works from someone proved dodgy/criminal. Then again, I'm sure I have done.

This is where I am on the matter as well.

I just try not to actively support the current and future work of known arseholes.

An absolute cunt can still possess talent. No getting around that. But I can decide where to put my money and support, and where not to.

b0r1s

It's difficult isn't it. Spacey was one that made me really question his films, but there are some corkers, and generally, he was only part of them, so I guess I've rationalised it to watch the historic stuff I already have.

b0r1s

Ahh, so as Nick and Poppo have said.

superflyninja

Kow wrote:

I think there's an easy conflation these days between people getting justifiably called to task for their actions and people getting jumped on for having an unpopular opinion or just being a bit dumb. Seeing as both seem to play out on social media they tend to get mixed up intro one thing. For example, when Nick Cave made the the decision to play Israel, and explained quite rationally why he was doing it, Twitter et al exploded with calls to boycott him and how his music was now shit and his records (and him) should be burned etc etc. There's no problem opposing someone's ideas but it seems to very easily turn into a storm of righteous indignation and demands for punishment. Jon Ronson's book So you've been publicly shamed is a good read about how small things can get completely out of hand via social media.

Well put squire.

davyK

The retrospective vs new stuff resonates with me as I judge myself to think the same way. Even though time shouldn't matter.

Does it depend on bad actions done after a performance or being contemporaneous?

Perhaps the feeling of experiencing the performance while ignorant no matter what overrides any revulsion? And I suppose the impact of a performance at first experience matters too.

Hard to categorically state my feelings on it.

davyK

superflyninja wrote:

Kow wrote:

I think there's an easy conflation these days between people getting justifiably called to task for their actions and people getting jumped on for having an unpopular opinion or just being a bit dumb. Seeing as both seem to play out on social media they tend to get mixed up intro one thing. For example, when Nick Cave made the the decision to play Israel, and explained quite rationally why he was doing it, Twitter et al exploded with calls to boycott him and how his music was now shit and his records (and him) should be burned etc etc. There's no problem opposing someone's ideas but it seems to very easily turn into a storm of righteous indignation and demands for punishment. Jon Ronson's book So you've been publicly shamed is a good read about how small things can get completely out of hand via social media.

Well put squire.

Agreed.

dynamiteReady

nick_md wrote:

I've decided to separate art from artist, sometimes with a few exceptions, for legacy work. I think I'd feel less inclined to accept new works from someone proved dodgy/criminal. Then again, I'm sure I have done.

I'd put off reading Shantaram for quite some time, because the author is clearly a prick, but I think I'm just going to overlook the fact, and read the shit.

There's worse out there.

Also, a tangential aside... Did you know that once Hitler attained power, he made a personal point of banning the disgusting 'human zoos` so beloved by Victorian culture? That prick was a mess.

dynamiteReady

Also related... Occidental culture latently worships Darwin.
The science is (mostly) unquestionable, but his ideology was abhorrent.

cockbeard

I think the retrospective vs new thing is a bit moot in the new streaming revenue age

If I listen to an old Lostprophets album I'm still putting money in Ian Watkins pocket

Moot_Geeza

There's usually a massive difference between being cancelled and Watkins though. Extreme example is extreme, of course, but I like to think no-one's listened to a Lost Prophets album since.

Wookienopants

My wife and I have this discussion on an almost monthly basis.
She is very much of the stance that once someone is outed as being a dick then we should immediately ban all of their music/movies/products etc.

I try to remind her that this is no better than book burnings used to be.

End of the day in many situations a piece of art is often not just the sole work of that individual, there are many many people behind the scenes who worked incredibly hard to get that film, TV show or album made.
By banning it and "cancelling" it what about all of those hard working people who had nothing to do with the guy or gals scummy behaviour?

Yossarian

cockbeard wrote:

I think the retrospective vs new thing is a bit moot in the new streaming revenue age

If I listen to an old Lostprophets album I'm still putting money in Ian Watkins pocket

It is possible to listen to the music without streaming it, though.

dynamiteReady wrote:

Also related... Occidental culture latently worships Darwin.
The science is (mostly) unquestionable, but his ideology was abhorrent.

This is an interesting point, we wouldn’t even question dismissing the work of those who have contributed to science, maths, medicine, and many other fields based on their personal failings.

cockbeard

True enough, used an extreme example as was first that sprang to mind. Was more thinking of the whole separation of art from artist thing, and just with the changing landscape if we use streaming services we're still supporting the artist. Not like buying a second hand album or taping it off your mate where the artist receives nothing

cockbeard

Agree Yoss, and I don't use a streaming service at the moment so no-one got paid except when I bought the stuff in the first place. But being as I'm stepping into that realm again it did make me think. Also Hello and My Gang have been sampled and given credits on so many other pieces of popular music that it's going to be difficult to avoid anyway

Wookienopants

Hey, we're all adults able to make our own decisions. I don't deny that MJ was probably a very sick man and a bit of a pedo.

Still like his music though.

The whole cancel culture thing can fuck off.
I mean it's important to know the truth behind an artist, it's important that they are held to account for their shitty behaviour and it's vital that we all learn from it.

It's the flat out demanding that they be "cancelled" that bothers me.
It's also the judgement that comes with it and the social media backlash for anyone who likes their material.

cockbeard

I guess the difference between art and science is that scientists (in many instances) aren't directly paid by the consumption of their work, whereas artists are. Plus I guess there's a proft/loss calculation folk make between how much this item enriches my life and what the human cost of it's production was

Yeah, cancel culture can fuck off, trial by soshal meedja is a bag of bollox and always will be

Yossarian

Define cancel culture.

Let’s take the Clarke situation for example, what we appear to have here (with the caveat that these accusations haven’t been proven in court) is a serial abuser who will no longer be able to use his position in order to abuse and harass people. Surely that’s a good thing?

Unlikely

As a result of a very thorough journalistic investigation. That's different to trial by social media, surely?

Brooks

It's the specific, rumour-fuelled tribunal of the (internet) commons thing that makes a thing Cancel Culture, yeah. This Clarke thing just seems like a bunch of proper crimes.

Wookienopants

Yea there's a difference between a person being investigated and tried through correct judicial process or journalistic investigation and a person being judged by social media.

Social media is very much a toxic environment of knee jerk opinions and people shouting without caring about evidence.

regmcfly

My wife and I, both massive fans, have removed Morrissey from our life because he is such a hateful being.
I've seen him live 6 times since 2002 and, I dunno, if a person is a piece of shit it's not hard to remove them from your life. Speedway might be one of my favourite songs of all time, but I've not listened to it in years.

Fuck Morrissey.

regmcfly

Wookienopants wrote:

Yea there's a difference between a person being investigated and tried through correct judicial process or journalistic investigation and a person being judged by social media.

Social media is very much a toxic environment of knee jerk opinions and people shouting without caring about evidence.

This is again reinforcing that there is something called "cancel culture".

There isn't. It's a term from the right to justify when a person gets removed from some type of public facing role because they have been a shitlord.

It boils down to the fact that no one has a "right" to work with anyone, and no company "has" to keep an employee on if they break with their image.

Brooks

I wonder how on earth anyone could gather enough solid evidence to even prove cancel culture is a structural ill worth getting upset about, beyond celebrities dealing with all the hot goss they've basically always had to take in one format or another. Most of the vociferous complainers seems to be antisocial shitwits in the first place.

Yossarian

Okay, let’s take Clarke as not an example of cancel culture, are there any actual examples of cancel culture from the last few years? I don’t doubt that it used to happen, but it’s been a while since I’ve come across any examples.

There have been some cases of people being blatantly racist on video who have lost jobs due to their blatant racism, but other than that, who has been tried by social media and suffered consequences due to it?

Brooks

Probably some makeup/beauty Youtuber drama, they're fucking great for that.

djchump

A lot of the types bitterly decrying “cancel culture” seem to be the same types that were cheering on gamergate at the time.

davyK

It's the interplay between the artist and the content put into context of his/her behaviour.

Take innocent examples. John Lennon warbling on about imagine having no possessions in his palatial listed home. Struck me as a tad false. (Indeed his killer called him a phony though not I'm saying there is a link). Doesn't make me enjoy the song any less though hypocrisy grates with me quite a bit.

Or the Gallagher bros - both pretty high up in my top of the pricks table. Still listen to Oasis though.

If the output tries to justify a hidden agenda such as hatred for a group say, or for a sexual deviance then that's the other end of the scale.

Brooks

As dogwhistles go, it's definitely easier to say than "political correctness gone maaaaaaaaad". Evolution, not revolution, bosh.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories