How Does New Music Help Us Resolve the Art vs. Artist Debate?

A look at the spectrum of opinions on how you separate art from artist, and a very special edition of "If You Like [X], Then You'll Like Y": new music recs based on your problematic favorites

If this newsletter ever turned you on to a band you wouldn’t have found otherwise, please consider a paid subscription. Support your friendly local (human!) music curator, and help keep the playlists bountiful across all platforms (did you know they’re on Qobuz and Tidal now? Party!)

Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio, “Giuditta e Oloferne.” 1598-1599.

In 1606, Caravaggio killed a man over a tennis bet. Or maybe it was over a prostitute. Regardless, he killed a man by trying to castrate him, lived on to achieve even greater fame for his art and notoriety for his violence, and earned a place in art history’s canon.

I’ll take a shot in the dark and say that you’re probably against murder.¹ I also have a feeling you’re not in any sudden rush to call up the Uffizi and demand that they rethink their 17th century installations.

When we are far removed from an artist, we have no problem separating them from their art.

But Caravaggio can’t disappoint us anymore. Many other artists can and do.

My deepest gratitude to Michael Taylor for starting the above chat, and for everyone who participated in the lively discussion — you can still join if you’re so inclined!

We’ve all had the gut-wrenching experience of learning that one of our musical² heroes actually leads a life of questionable morals. What once we may have dismissed as typical rock star behavior has since developed into something far more sinister. Harmful conspiracy theories, blatant bigotry, sexual predation — all now par for the course in the music industry and beyond (the many sordid details of which I won’t relitigate here).

It makes sense that we’re increasingly interested in how to navigate a world where everyone’s dirty laundry is out on display and up for scrutiny.

When an artist is our contemporary and their values don’t align with ours, we feel morally obligated to act.

It’s not the most complicated concept to come to terms with. It’s (arguably) immaterial if we take umbrage with Caravaggio, Wagner, Lovecraft or any number of other objectionable greats throughout art’s history. We’re fighting with corpses.

Never meet your heroes.

But artists doing Bad Things in the here and now are — well, alive. We may want to take them to task, and hope that how we choose to interact with their work has some tangible effect.

Below, I’ll lay out some of the ways you approach the age-old question: How do you separate art from the artist?

Then, you’ll get a very special If You Like [X], Then You’ll Like [Y]: Problematic Faves Edition.

Separating Art From Artist Is A Spectrum, Not A Binary

When we encounter a problematic fave in the wild, most of us start negotiating. Over time, we develop little rules for ourselves about how (and whether) we’ll continue to listen.

Many of you have already told me how you tackle this complex problem, and I’ve made an attempt at mapping your responses on a scale, in order from most to least strict:

1. Complete Cancelation: Refusal to participate in the offending artist(s)’ work, full stop.

   

2. Financial Disengagement: Listening isn’t so much the issue as funding is. Money talks.

   

3. Passive Disengagement: No active boycott per se, but a slow fade, whether because of disinterest or discomfort.

   

4. Chronological Split: Sometimes it’s easy to separate bodies of work into “before” and “after” the ideological divide.

   

5. Hierarchical Judgment: Not all offenses are made equal.

   

6. Emotional Compartmentalization: The artist might be flawed, but memories are sacred.

   

7. Art Isn’t Artist: …and that’s that.

   

8. Zero Guilt: Good music is good music, so just listen and enjoy. Why are we punishing ourselves?

   

Where would you plot yourself on this spectrum?

I’m not here to make value judgments; you’re plenty good at doing that on your own. But I do want to zoom in on one approach that doesn’t fit the spectrum at all. And it’s the single most important point I want you take away from this essay:

New Music Is The Answer

If an old favorite let you down, look forward, not back — there’s a whole world of new artists ready to take their place.

There’s never going to be a single tidy solution to Michael Taylor’s question. Whether and how to separate art from artist is both highly personal and very context-dependent.

But forward motion is what can help us stay a bit more optimistic.

I’ve learned a lot about art, music, and literature from consuming the works of some extremely problematic greats. And I regret nothing. I am a smarter, more thoughtful, and more versatile person for having engaged with them. Retroactive recognition of thought systems that don’t fit our modern morals is important, but it’s no excuse for historical revisionism.

This is precisely why staying curious about new art is such a big deal. It removes the false dichotomy between moral purity and cultural literacy. It lets us move forward without pretending the past didn’t happen.

This is the 2nd half of the comment in Approach #1 in the spectrum above, just FYI.

Foundational artists don’t need to be defended or centered forever. Their work can be understood as part of a lineage — one that is allowed to evolve.

For example —

If you grew up on The Smiths and decided Morrissey is a prick who’s not worth supporting, then go explore new artists shaped by his influence; his artistic legacy will thankfully outlive his rapidly degenerating persona.³

Better yet, it doesn’t really matter where you are on that spectrum for new music discovery to be an appealing option. Whether you’re outright canceling or just pulling back your dollars, it still loosens the release valve. Frankly, you don’t even have to feel any guilt at all about your favorite musicians’ politics⁴ to add new music into the mix.

Moving forward doesn’t have to mean forgetting or forgiving⁵, right? Maybe we’re just doing a little musical Marie Kondo-ing here.

Old Problems, New Solutions

As promised, I’m giving you a special edition of “If You Like [X], Then You’ll [Y]” featuring 6 artists you may not feel comfortable supporting anymore and more than a dozen new artists that you should check out instead.

(If you’re a paid subscriber, you’ll get an extra post with more artists and a playlist soon.)

Some of the musicians on this list are obnoxious but ultimately harmless.

Others have done or said some truly reprehensible things.

But whether you object to them on a visceral level or you just find that listening to them isn’t as fun as it used to be⁶, then (say it with me, now!) new music is the answer.

1. Kanye West

His antisemitism, praise for Hitler, and denial of the Holocaust are more than many can stomach at this point.

If what you’re looking for is hip-hop with sleek production and dense soul samples, try:

• redveil

• Ghais Guevara

• John Michel + Anthony James

2. Morrissey

Looking back, there were probably signs he’d end up a crotchety old man, but over the years he’s so far down the racist, sexist, xenophobic pipeline that it’s difficult to laugh it off as grandpa being grandpa.

If what you’re looking for is crooning vocals over hip-swinging beats, try:

• The Velvet Hands

• Thus Love

• Hamish Hawk

3. Arcade Fire

Win Butler’s history of inappropriate sexual conduct has soured a lot of fans.

If what you’re looking for is anthemic, cinematic indie rock, try:

• Friko

• Black Country, New Road

4. Prince

He became a Jehova’s Witness later in life, which made him turn on the LGBTQ community that he had symbolized and had brought him so much support.

If what you’re looking for is funky, soulful, pop-tinged R&B, try:

• Dijon

• Nourished by Time

• Mk.gee

5. M.I.A.

From radical anti-establishment thinker to cuckoo conspiracy peddler, it’s been tough to watch Maya Arulpragasam devolve from a freedom fighter in reality to one just in her own mind.

Luckily, I’ve already written an entire article with alternative recommendations:

Missing in Action: M.I.A.'s Arular 20 Years Later

6. John Lydon

Full-on fascist, or just curmudgeonly, anti-woke belly-aching? Either way, coming from a Sex Pistol, the cognitive dissonance hits harder.

If it’s the Sex Pistols’ brand of punk you want, try:

• The Chats

If it’s Public Image Ltd.’s more experimental brand of post-punk you want, try:

• Snapped Ankles

---

There’s also Bowie, Thurston Moore, Gwen Stefani, and others. Paid subs, stay tuned for more + a playlist 💙

---

1. No offense, murder lovers!

2. Sorry for the fine arts → music whiplash, but you can’t blame me for feeling compelled to shoehorn in that incredible example!

3. It also doesn’t hurt that Morrissey’s newest single is absolute trash. Between us, though, I’m gonna keep listening to The Smiths and their sonic descendants. I CAN HAVE IT ALL.

There is a Light That Never Goes Out

4. But all art is political. #sorrynotsorry

5. Or even not listening anymore.

6. Or you don’t give a shit either way and you’re not going to stop listening to them — we’ve already established that it doesn’t matter because you get to listen to fun new music either way! Win win.