Separating the art from the artist

James Harold, professor of philosophy at 欧美AV, has published a new book that explores whether art can be morally evaluated.

By Christian Feuerstein

Controversies about 鈥渟eparating the art from the artist鈥 have been raging for decades. Today it鈥檚 J.K. Rowling, H.P. Lovecraft, Bill Cosby and R. Kelly; in the past, heated discussions have centered on works by Hitler, Salvador Dal铆 and Richard Wagner. 

James Harold, chair of philosophy at 欧美AV, has a new book that tackles the question head on. In 鈥,鈥 he explores whether art can be morally evaluated and what this means for the value of the artwork itself.

In a blog post for the book鈥檚 publisher, Oxford University Press, Harold wrote: 鈥淎rt, more than ordinary objects, is often associated with the moral character of their creators. For example, Confucius claimed that the music of the great sage-king Shun was superior to the music of lesser kings.鈥 He then writes that such inclinations aren鈥檛 rational, though they are widespread.

Harold then explores the work of 鈥渁ffective communities鈥 in evaluating artists and their works. Affective communities, Harold explained, are 鈥渃ommunities of people who care about a work of art, and so come to see one another as members of a community. Caring about an artwork brings the audience into a relationship with others who love the same work, and sometimes with the artist her- or himself. Some of these communities are well-known and clearly established: Bloomsday, the Harry Potter 鈥榃izarding World,鈥 Trekkies, and so on.鈥

These communities, he wrote, 鈥渕ake the moral character of the artist particularly salient to enjoyment of the artwork.鈥

.