Problematic creators and their music

[itu]

Should I print "sarcasm" over my previous comment?

[Damnthatlazlo]

For me, I’m not really good at separating the art from the artist thing. Mostly cos, I mean R. Kelly really was the worlds greatest!!! 
🤣🤣

 

Seriously though, I think people are quite happy to dump on R Kelly but if they really like the artist then it’s a different story. Selective outrage…no joke my wife’s just put on Chris rocks new video and he literally talks about this. I’m freaked out now 🤣🤣

 

Anyway, I loved Ryan Adams but after the stories about him, the lyrics don’t read the same way. I can’t enjoy it the same way. 
 

 

[Jakester]

Well, the decision has been taken to put it to the members on a vote. We don’t generally do that - it’s more a benign dictatorship (and the dictator ain’t me!) so I’ll be interesting to see what the outcome is.
 

Probably 48%/52% knowing our luck!

[lemmywinks]

Micheal Jackson was found to be innocent in court.

 

Twice.

 

 

 

I have and would still play his songs, wouldn't have anything to do with Paed Townshend's music though.

[tauzero]

7 minutes ago, lemmywinks said:

Micheal Jackson was found to be innocent in court.

 

Twice.

 

 

 

I have and would still play his songs, wouldn't have anything to do with Paed Townshend's music though.

 

Even though Townshend was never even tried for any offence? Rather a case of double standards, isn't it?

[lemmywinks]

1 hour ago, tauzero said:

 

Even though Townshend was never even tried for any offence? Rather a case of double standards, isn't it?

 

He admitted guilt and accepted a police caution, got off very lightly by all accounts and was put on the sex offenders' register. He paid to access images of very young children being violently sexually assaulted. His PR did a very good job of reducing the impact on his profile which is why we still get people thinking he was innocent.

 

Contrast to Michael Jackson who had the opposite - trial by media where he was assumed guilty from the off and when the evidence was examined he was found to be innocent. Twice.

 

 

I used to assume Jackson was guilty (just like everybody else) but as soon as you start digging it's quite alarming how he was treated. It is indeed very different to Pete Townshend who is a child sex offender yet seems to have gotten away with it and can remain in the public eye.

 

 

 

[Russ]

I choose to vote with my wallet. I will not further enrich people whose words or actions I find disagreeable by listening to, paying for or in any way “boosting” their output. 

 

This includes racists (Clapton, etc), paedos and perverts (Gary Glitter, Ian Watkins from Lostprophets, Townsend, Marilyn Manson, etc), far-right-wing nutjobs, conspiracy theorists, religious weirdos and fascist sympathisers (Morrissey, Waters, Ted Nugent, Dave Mustaine, Kid Rock and pretty much all American country music stars), Brexiteers (Daltrey/Townsend, Bruce Dickinson, Morrissey and so on) and those who promote violence and division. 

 

For some of the older bands and musicians, I’m prepared to acknowledge that their views and actions were of their time, not that this gives them a pass, but rather a context. Same as old Tom & Jerry cartoons, or the likes of Bernard Manning and Jim Davidson. Not sure I’d include Michael Jackson in that though. I’m sure that his activities were less-than-appropriate to everyone who didn’t live inside his weird little bubble, but he was hardly Ian Watkins. 

 

 

[miles'tone]

Covering MJ is a weird topic - Even Ian Brown (not one to pull punches on his views on anything) covered Billie Jean in 1999. After MJ's death later on he said this:

 

In an interview with Q magazine he says the following when asked about MJ's death:

'Mixed feelings. He died for me in 1993 when the allegations about Jordy Chandler first came out. I did my grieving then. I heard him say it was OK to share a bed with 12-year-old kids, and I know it isn't'.

The reason he was asked is because he was always a big MJ fan.

 

 

Regarding the title of this thread...

 

I'm a BIG fan of Frank Zappa's music but ever since I learned that bass player Roy Estrada is now a convicted paedophile, I can't and don't listen to the Mothers Of Invention music anymore. 

RE took the humor out of that particular music for me.

[TimR]

16 hours ago, MacDaddy said:

 

Rock and Roll Christmas, was.

Didn't even know that was Gary Glitter. 

 

 

[Mykesbass]

9 hours ago, itu said:

Should I print "sarcasm" over my previous comment?

No, but you should probably delete it and not post when you are under the influence.

[TimR]

We have a justice system that decides guilt and a proportionate punishment to avoid this kind of lynch mob and vigilantism, even if it is virtual.

 

The idea is that the people who are in full possession of the facts, and hear the evidence first hand make the decisions, not a bunch of people who read second hand badly reported events, often sensationalised to sell whatever media they're published on. 

 

Then the offender does the punishment and is rehabilitated back into society when appropriate. 

 

Otherwise you will get more of this cancel culture and the world will spiral into a big mess where anyone can potentially lose their reputation, job, house and family, just becasue someone starts a rumour or wants to further their own agenda. 

 

 

 

Edited March 23, 2023 by TimR

[miles'tone]

55 minutes ago, TimR said:

We have a justice system that decides guilt and a proportionate punishment to avoid this kind of lynch mob and vigilantism, even if it is virtual.

 

The idea is that the people who are in full possession of the facts, and hear the evidence first hand make the decisions, not a bunch of people who read second hand badly reported events, often sensationalised to sell whatever media they're published on. 

 

Then the offender does the punishment and is rehabilitated back into society when appropriate. 

 

Otherwise you will get more of this cancel culture and the world will spiral into a big mess where anyone can potentially lose their reputation, job, house and family, just becasue someone starts a rumour or wants to further their own agenda. 

 

 

 

I understand what you're saying and agree with you regarding cancel culture, but what or who in particular are you referring to? I'm not sure I understand the context here.

[Waddo Soqable]

Tbh I don't even think of the artist.. music conjures an era rather than a person, Rock and Roll parts 1 and 2 etc, to me just scream early 70s and everything about that time, reminds me of what I was doing then etc etc.. I don't think "Gary Glitter" at all, same with any other well known piece of music.  How many people consider Beethoven and his life when listening to the 5th symphony?.. probably not a lot. 

There's lots of songs that were everywhere when I was a teenager, that I remember & could sing to you now, but I haven't a clue who the artist was.. A successful piece of music, song whatever, has a life of it's own. 

[Jakester]

2 hours ago, TimR said:

We have a justice system that decides guilt and a proportionate punishment to avoid this kind of lynch mob and vigilantism, even if it is virtual.

 

The idea is that the people who are in full possession of the facts, and hear the evidence first hand make the decisions, not a bunch of people who read second hand badly reported events, often sensationalised to sell whatever media they're published on. 

 

Then the offender does the punishment and is rehabilitated back into society when appropriate. 

 

Otherwise you will get more of this cancel culture and the world will spiral into a big mess where anyone can potentially lose their reputation, job, house and family, just becasue someone starts a rumour or wants to further their own agenda. 

 

I strongly object to this reductive characterisation of what is clearly a fairly nuanced discussion to the level of ‘cancel culture’ and ‘a lynch mob’. 
 

This is not someone taking imagined offence and requiring everyone else to agree with them; this is a specific practical issue concerning one artist. It’s clear from the replies that there are a range of well-considered views, as there should be with any artistic discourse. 
 

Society changes, art changes with it. What might have been appropriate *artistically* 50 years ago may not be now (Brown Sugar being a good example). 
 

Discourse about these issues is the very opposite of so-called ‘cancel culture’ in my view. 

[MacDaddy]

6 hours ago, Russ said:

I choose to vote with my wallet. I will not further enrich people whose words or actions I find disagreeable by listening to, paying for or in any way “boosting” their output. 

 

This includes racists (Clapton, etc), paedos and perverts (Gary Glitter, Ian Watkins from Lostprophets, Townsend, Marilyn Manson, etc), far-right-wing nutjobs, conspiracy theorists, religious weirdos and fascist sympathisers (Morrissey, Waters, Ted Nugent, Dave Mustaine, Kid Rock and pretty much all American country music stars), Brexiteers (Daltrey/Townsend, Bruce Dickinson, Morrissey and so on) and those who promote violence and division. 

 

For some of the older bands and musicians, I’m prepared to acknowledge that their views and actions were of their time, not that this gives them a pass, but rather a context. Same as old Tom & Jerry cartoons, or the likes of Bernard Manning and Jim Davidson. Not sure I’d include Michael Jackson in that though. I’m sure that his activities were less-than-appropriate to everyone who didn’t live inside his weird little bubble, but he was hardly Ian Watkins. 

 

 

 

So you only listen to Cliff Richard?

[Greg Edwards69]

6 hours ago, Russ said:

I choose to vote with my wallet. I will not further enrich people whose words or actions I find disagreeable by listening to, paying for or in any way “boosting” their output. 

 

This includes racists (Clapton, etc), paedos and perverts (Gary Glitter, Ian Watkins from Lostprophets, Townsend, Marilyn Manson, etc), far-right-wing nutjobs, conspiracy theorists, religious weirdos and fascist sympathisers (Morrissey, Waters, Ted Nugent, Dave Mustaine, Kid Rock and pretty much all American country music stars), Brexiteers (Daltrey/Townsend, Bruce Dickinson, Morrissey and so on) and those who promote violence and division. 

 

For some of the older bands and musicians, I’m prepared to acknowledge that their views and actions were of their time, not that this gives them a pass, but rather a context. Same as old Tom & Jerry cartoons, or the likes of Bernard Manning and Jim Davidson. Not sure I’d include Michael Jackson in that though. I’m sure that his activities were less-than-appropriate to everyone who didn’t live inside his weird little bubble, but he was hardly Ian Watkins. 

I sincerely get your viewpoint and support you for standing up to your convictions. However, I do feel for the other band members of these artists who were involved in the writing process and no longer receive tidy royalty payments and have effectively had their body of work ripped away from them.  IIRC correctly, Ian Watkins' bandmates for example, knew he was a bit perverted but genuinely had no idea of the extent of his depravity.  Whether that's true or not, only they really know, but never-the-less, the Lost Phophets just stopped overnight and fans refused to support their collective music because it was tainted by the actions of one man.

[cetera]

6 minutes ago, MacDaddy said:

 

So you only listen to Cliff Richard?

 

*cough* ......glass table..... Una Stubbs..... allegedly..... 🙄🤣😂

[TimR]

59 minutes ago, Jakester said:

I strongly object to this reductive characterisation of what is clearly a fairly nuanced discussion to the level of ‘cancel culture’ and ‘a lynch mob’. 

 

I don't see it as being nuanced at all. If we are to live in a civilised society, we need to try and follow the laws as they are, not set up our own imagined punishments for crimes that may (and often weren't) committed. That way lies madness, as @Greg Edwards69 points out.

 

This isn't about music and society changing and not being relevant. This is about the musician being targeted for something disparate from the music. And possibly in the OP's case a bunch of people controlling the music that the rest of the band find perfectly acceptable, and for actually no good reason other than what they've been told by the media. 

 

It's exactly the same as no platforming someone because you don't agree with their political views. I have no interest in seeing Billy Bragg or Paul Young, mainly because I imagine there's a fair chunk of their concerts that will be political speeches and statements. I'm happy to go and see U2, because the music is good, and while it has a message in most of the lyrics, the message doesn't seem to be divisive. But I'm not telling Billy Brag or the guys in my band, or my local radio station not to play his music.

[Woodinblack]

8 hours ago, Russ said:

 pretty much all American country music stars

 

Well, not Dolly Parton! I mean I wouldn't do her stuff as I don't do country music, but she does a lot of good work outside music.

 

2 hours ago, Greg Edwards69 said:

However, I do feel for the other band members of these artists who were involved in the writing process and no longer receive tidy royalty payments and have effectively had their body of work ripped away from them.

 

I do too - always felt sorry for them, they lost their royalties and their incomes and I would imagine a good part of their future prospects, when you look at groups they says 'the bass player used to be with xxx' - not such a selling point.

 

[Leonard Smalls]

2 hours ago, Greg Edwards69 said:

Jim Davidson

Strangely, I read that as "Jim Division", and thought what an entertainingly bizarre thing a Joy Division tribute with Jim Davidson-alike singer would be! At least for about 2 minutes...

[miles'tone]

24 minutes ago, Leonard Smalls said:

Strangely, I read that as "Jim Division", and thought what an entertainingly bizarre thing a Joy Division tribute with Jim Davidson-alike singer would be! At least for about 2 minutes...

🤣🤣🤣

[SubsonicSimpleton]

16 hours ago, Woodinblack said:

he was never tried, MJ was.

I realise that I should have probably cited OJ Simpson if we are taking the US Justice system as being infallible and never showing erroneous or favourable outcomes to people who are rich, famous or politically connected, and not guilty verdicts as an absolute indicator of innocence.

 

I reckon that Thriller is one of the best pop albums of all time, and there is no denying how important economically MJ was to the music industry or indeed how beloved he was by his enormous fanbase, but if you look at the overall pattern of his behaviour towards the boys and their families, it doesn't look like innocent eccentricity to me, it looks decidedly like he used his fame and wealth to groom the families into allowing him unsupervised access to their children.

 

 

[lemmywinks]

There was absolutely no evidence of Jackson doing anything abusive. The OJ SImpson case is controversial, the two MJ trials aren't. In fact they're alarmingly conclusive if you want to look into them, nobody ever does though.

 

He was no doubt a very strange man, he was also someone with a lot of mental health issues and extreme social anxiety. At points literally terrified to be around adults but at ease with children. Guy Pratt provides a some insight into his behaviour in a working environment in one of his YT videos.

 

Put simply people think Jackson was guilty because they have been told a series of carefully selected and manipulated lines. The same people think Paed Townshend is innocent because they have been told a series of carefully selected and manipulated lines.

[TimR]

9 minutes ago, lemmywinks said:

Put simply people think Jackson was guilty because they have been told a series of carefully selected and manipulated lines. The same people think Paed Townshend is innocent because they have been told a series of carefully selected and manipulated lines.

 

 

There's a whole lot more people who have absolutely no interest and just want to play music. Repeatedly dragging up things from the past, that only you are interested in, will not change that, it's pointless and boring. 

[lemmywinks]

4 minutes ago, TimR said:

 

 

There's a whole lot more people who have absolutely no interest and just want to play music. Repeatedly dragging up things from the past, that only you are interested in, will not change that, it's pointless and boring. 

 

Well that's fine, they can do as they wish. I aint gonna line a nonce's pocket so I will also do as I wish. Not sure what your point is or what relevancy it has to the OP's issue but you do you.

Edited March 23, 2023 by lemmywinks