Do artists have to be moral? New generation is bashing Picasso.

B

BidenPresident

Verified User
In his astonishing range and invention, Picasso—who died 50 years ago, on April 8th 1973—was among the 20th century’s greatest artists. He was also an abusive goat, with a nauseating fondness for much younger women (40 years younger in Ms Gilot’s case). “Once they were bled dry,” his granddaughter Marina wrote of his women, “he would dispose of them.” Two went on to kill themselves.

read://https_www.economist.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.economist.com%2Fculture%2F2023%2F04%2F05%2Fpicasso-was-a-genius-and-a-beast-can-the-two-be-separated

Why did Picasso owe these women anything?
 
BidenPresident said:
In his astonishing range and invention, Picasso—who died 50 years ago, on April 8th 1973—was among the 20th century’s greatest artists. He was also an abusive goat, with a nauseating fondness for much younger women (40 years younger in Ms Gilot’s case). “Once they were bled dry,” his granddaughter Marina wrote of his women, “he would dispose of them.” Two went on to kill themselves.

read://https_www.economist.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.economist.com%2Fculture%2F2023%2F04%2F05%2Fpicasso-was-a-genius-and-a-beast-can-the-two-be-separated

Why did Picasso owe these women anything?
Click to expand...

No one has to be moral.
 
BidenPresident said:
What is the "Historians' fallacy?"
Click to expand...

hqdefault.jpg


When those in the present apply their morals and values to events in the past as a yardstick, they are committing a historical or historian's fallacy.
 
Guille said:
I do not think word means what you think it means. Define moral.
Click to expand...

"morals" are the standards each person chooses to live by.......it is rare that any two people have chosen EXACTLY the same standards except in the most general terms.......even "do no harm to others" needs to be fine tuned to the specific circumstances one faces in life......I'm sure that even Edward Gein (the cannibal from Wisconsin) believed he was acting "morally" as he determined it.....
 
The author of this article must have run out of ideas to write about, because this motif is neither original nor new.

People of have been debating for decades how to balance the obvious brilliance of Richard Wagner's music against his antisemitism and toxic personality.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
"morals" are the standards each person chooses to live by.......it is rare that any two people have chosen EXACTLY the same standards except in the most general terms.......even "do no harm to others" needs to be fine tuned to the specific circumstances one faces in life......I'm sure that even Edward Gein (the cannibal from Wisconsin) believed he was acting "morally" as he determined it.....
Click to expand...

I was with you until the leatherface observation.
 
Morals do not actually exist, they are defined by the society itself. If a society believes an artists work is immoral then it is.
 
Answering the OP … No. One can like or dislike their “art” based on their known morals, but to be considered an artist one doesn’t have to be moral.

I could also ask, what kind of “artist” are you talking about. Since you mention Picasso, I infer that you are talking about artists who create paintings.?.?

Society is applying the same logic to great leaders of the past like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. Is it fair? IMO, no it isn’t. But they’re doing it anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top