Can You Separate Art from the Artist?
TL;DR: It’s possible to separate art from the artist if you acknowledge harm, don’t excuse it, and try not to fund harmful people while uplifting better creators.
Content note: Mentions of abuse, racism, and harassment.
Introduction
You know what I hate? When terrible people profit and get praise for creating works of art.
And you know what I hate even more? When their art is actually amazing.
I’m talking about the kind of art that touches audiences, inspires others, and leaves a legacy. Art can change lives—even if it’s just one person. It adds to the enjoyment and betterment of society.
And something so good definitely shouldn’t come from people who are racist, predatory, or violent.
And yet… sometimes it does. So, what the hell do we do then?
“Separating art from the artist isn’t about pretending everything is fine—it’s about choosing awareness over ignorance.”
The Current Discourse
There’s been a ton of conversation around a certain “David” musician lately. The news shocked a lot of people, especially because the music was beautiful, the kind that gets you through hard times.
Finding out your fave might’ve done terrible things tilts your whole worldview. It breaks trust, sows betrayal, and shatters something in you. I’ve seen former fans trying to process it, and it honestly breaks my heart that something as pure as creating art can come from people who might be deeply unwell.
This isn’t new. Prominent examples include J.K. Rowling, Woody Allen, Kanye West, Diddy, R. Kelly, J.D. Salinger, Marilyn Manson, Charles Manson, Ezra Miller, Bill Cosby, Onision, and Illuminaughtii (Blair). The list goes on! Allegations and controversies range from hateful or racist behavior to manipulation, violence, and even murder (in some cases, convicted).
You don’t have to be perfect to be an artist—hell you don’t have to be perfect to be human—but not being cruel to people for simply existing feels like a low bar.
The Big Question
Can we enjoy art when the artist behind it is harmful?
Should the artist’s actions forever stain their work?
This is the heart of the “separate art from artist” debate. It’s messy. On one hand, art can take on a life of its own beyond the creator. On the other, our attention, our money, and our praise can still uplift people who don’t deserve it.
Arguments For Separation
FOR: Art Takes on a Life of Its Own
When you share art with the world, it’s no longer fully under your control. Meaning becomes shared; audiences reinterpret, remix, and give new life to it.
Greek myths: once local and often violent/problematic are now retold globally with new emphasis and meaning.
Anne Rice & fanworks: She infamously tried to control the Interview with the Vampire fandom (even suing small fan-fic writers; seriously? They weren’t even profiting from it). Yet her work still inspired a wave of the broody tortured vampire media—Twilight, Buffy, The Vampire Diaries. Which goes to show, you can’t shut down inspiration.
Because the reality of creating art is that: Creation breeds creation, whether the original artist likes it or not.
FOR: You Can’t Erase Cultural Impact
Some works shape entire genres, industries, or social movements! The amount of identity made through art not just for individuals but for nations is unquantifiable. Discarding that impact erases cultural history.
Dr. Seuss: A legacy marred by racist caricatures (notably during the 1940s internment era) and personal controversies—and an undeniable influence on children’s literature and early education. Both truths can coexist.
FOR: The Work Is Bigger Than One Creator
Large projects involve hundreds of collaborators—designers, editors, crew, etc.—who aren’t the problematic figure.
Boycotts or cancellations can erase their labor; sometimes people never get paid when projects are buried after misconduct allegations! Imagine putting in that work your proud of and then bam, it’s the nations shame. The “name” may keep platform and paychecks but it’s the workers that eat the loss.
FOR: Personal Connection Matters
If a song helped you through grief or a story inspired your career, that experience is yours. Your comfort and growth don’t vanish if the creator is revealed to be awful.
Rowling & Harry Potter: Her transphobic statements have hurt the trans community and made people clock the contrast between her and her work. Yet for millions, including some within the trans community, those books still mean childhood, friendship, hope, acceptance and belonging. That meaning now lives with readers, not the author.
FOR: Moral Purity Isn’t Realistic
If we demanded perfection from every artist across history, we would literally have to erase most of human art and culture. Context matters without excusing harm.
Picasso: groundbreaking modern artist and notoriously cruel to women. Erasing him would gut modern art history; acknowledging the harm complicates (and should complicate) how we view him.
We can’t erase the past, but we can choose how we carry art forward.
Arguments Against Separation
AGAINST: Money = Support
If an artist is alive, buying, streaming, or viewing can funnel money and power to them.
R. Kelly: Despite his conviction and prison time, legal streams to his music still generate royalties. For many, that’s intolerable. And rightly so! Supporting the music feels like supporting the man and condoning his actions.
AGAINST: The Work Isn’t Always “Separate”
Sometimes the harm is baked into the art and it’s hard to unsee it.
Woody Allen: Recurring older-man/teen girl dynamics echo personal controversies; many find his films impossible to separate from that reality.
AGAINST: Platforming = Amplification
In our current modern landscape, attention is currency. Views, likes, and shares sustain relevance, which becomes cultural influence and more opportunities.
Jeffree Star: Years of racist comments, harassment allegations, and toxic feuds. But constant attention still translated into brand deals and sales for him. In this attention economy, outrage can be a business model.
AGAINST: It Erases Victims
Celebrating harmful creators minimizes real harms and sends the message that talent excuses abuse.
Marilyn Manson: Multiple allegations of sexual abuse/coercion. Die-hard defenders often attacked the accusers, retraumatizing survivors and normalizing the idea that artistry outweighs accountability.
AGAINST: Accountability Matters (Boycotts)
When institutions fail, collective refusal is one of the few tools we as audiences have. Boycotts don’t just dent profits, they shift perception and set norms. One stream may not change the world, but millions of tiny choices add up.
Bottom Line? Money and attention empower harm. Platforming can erase victims and undermine accountability.
Where I Land (The “Messy Middle”)
Honestly, both sides make valid points. Some people can’t separate art from the artist. And that’s okay! Everyone navigates this subject according to their values and comfort.
I believe separation is possible only if you engage critically and ethically. Here’s the framework I use:
1) Acknowledge the harm
Recognize it. Name it. Don’t sugarcoat or pretend it isn’t there.
2) Consumption ≠ endorsement (but beware excuses!)
Loving a work doesn’t automatically make you a bad person. The line is crossed when people actively defend or excuse harm just to protect their faves.
3) Engage ethically
If the creator is alive and profiting, avoid funding them: buy secondhand, limit streams/clicks, or enjoy what you already own. And if you can, sail the high seas 🚢 , as they say.
Better yet, uplift alternative artists who aren’t causing harm! There’s many out there that are just as talented and have beautiful art to offer. In the end, your choices matter. Remember that!
“Hold space for both truths: art can be meaningful, and creators can still be harmful.”
What’s Next
If you want to see this framework applied to a specific case, my next article/video dives into Gone with the Wind—a classic that’s still romanticized despite its harmful narrative. Feels like a landmine waiting to explode but personally, it needs to be addressed.
About the Background Art
In my YouTube Video, I show b-roll screen recordings of my comic page process from my short psychological horror comic Don’t Come In—a Hades x Persephone reimagining with dark romance, mature themes, and NSFW content.
Read it exclusively on Patreon (Bioluminescent Babes tier). Is there a happily-ever-after? Depends who you ask 🫢
Final Thoughts
I hate when terrible people profit and hold power through their art. But what I love more is that audiences can choose to engage differently by acknowledging harm, enjoying art responsibly, and uplifting creators who don’t hurt others.
At the end of the day, this isn’t about moral perfection—it’s about awareness and agency!
—