Crimebuster
CCF Podcast Guru
Making comics!
Posts: 3,958 
|
Post by Crimebuster on Jul 16, 2015 17:42:25 GMT -5
I'm not sure if this is the right place for this discussion - might be better suited for the Meanwhile section, I'm not sure - but since it involves legendary classic comics editor Julie Schwartz, this seemed as good a place as any. Like just about everyone else, I've been watching this Bill Cosby mess unfold with disgust. But one thing that came to mind when thinking about it was the similarity between this and accusations against Julie Schwartz. Not that Julie was spiking drinks, but both Bill Cosby and Julie Schwartz were beloved authority figures in their respective fields, widely respected and admired. And like Cosby, Julie has in recent years had a number of woman come forward to accuse him of sexual harassment and assault, most notably Colleen Doran. You can read a little bit about it here, in the context of a discussion about other more recent issues with harassment in the comics community. it got me thinking about how we view the legacy of comic creators like Schwartz. Another example is Lil' Abner creator Al Capp, who was famously sued by a coed for attempted rape and who by all accounts was a sexual predator who routinely targeted college girls. What do we do with this? How does - or should - it affect the way we evaluate their work? |
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jul 16, 2015 17:48:08 GMT -5
It doesn't effect how I evaluate their work in any way.
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jul 16, 2015 18:19:14 GMT -5
It doesn't effect how I evaluate their work in any way. I try my best to seperate the creators from the work at times but there are many situations where I simply can't. I mean, I won't degrade their work but I will refuse to give them any more of my money, creators like Orson Scott Card and Cosby are members of that group. |
|
|
|
Post by Phil Maurice on Jul 16, 2015 18:23:20 GMT -5
It doesn't effect how I evaluate their work in any way. Agree 100%. I'm a huge fan of (the work of) numerous artists who ran the gamut from flawed to monstrous in the way they conducted their personal lives: James Brown, Ray Charles, Buddy Rich, Errol Flynn, Orson Welles, Elvis, John Lennon, Jimmy Page, and on and on. People are messy, disappointing, often vile creatures. The work must stand on its own. The alternative dismisses great swathes of history, experience, and enlightenment to the ultimate detriment of the culture.
Even the evil Dr. Mengele's horrific experiments yielded valuable data from which effective treatments were eventually derived. Having said that (and I may rightly be taken to task for it  ), I think it is possible to venerate the work while condemning the man.
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jul 16, 2015 18:34:23 GMT -5
It doesn't effect how I evaluate their work in any way. I try my best to seperate the creators from the work at times but there are many situations where I simply can't. I mean, I won't degrade their work but I will refuse to give them any more of my money, creators like Orson Scott Card and Cosby are members of that group. Oh, I won't give Card money. No way. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't read his work for free if it seemed like I wanted too. And I'm pretty unlikely to ever give Cosby money...but I'm not sure that he's done anything where that would even be an option in eons. But I grew up listening to records of his stand-up...and it's still funny. |
|
|
|
Post by adamwarlock2099 on Jul 16, 2015 20:40:56 GMT -5
I usually don't try to find out things about people in entertainments personal lives. It's harder with such easy access to information via the internet what people have done or have been accused of doing that you'd have to never talk to another human being to not know some of these things. But even if I do tend to hear things I wouldn't otherwise seek out I tend to be able to separate the two. It's just a job even if it's not a job of necessity. I'm not going to move cause I find out my mailman does heroin. I will move if I find out he steals mail.
|
|
|
|
Post by hondobrode on Jul 16, 2015 23:01:56 GMT -5
No one is perfect. If you look closely enough at any person or institution, you'll find things you don't like.
I'd heard that Doran had been approached by someone but I didn't know who until now, and Wow !, Brian Wood ?! Who'da thought ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Jul 17, 2015 0:45:21 GMT -5
With me, it depends on the level of depravity on my ethical and moral scale (Which I'm going to assume is close to the ideal for most people.). Anything that involves rape, murder, drugging women for sex, animal cruelty, and so on, instantly puts up a wall between me and the artist from that point on. Not only will I refuse to support them, but I'll desire to see their lives, and their reputations, crash and burn. They deserve it. Obviously none of us are perfect, but there is a gigantic gap between common foibles (cheating on your spouse, downloading pirated media, drinking too much, etc.) and sociopathic and sadistic tendencies directed at innocent people.
|
|
|
|
Post by batlaw on Jul 17, 2015 4:01:51 GMT -5
What do we do with this? How does - or should - it affect the way we evaluate their work? Personally such things don't effect how I "evaluate their work". It may cause me to interpret it differently depending on the specifics, but I evaluate the work (new and old), on its own merit. however such controversy or new info will occasionally cause me to reevaluate how much, if at all I support their work going forward. For example, I dropped new Capt. America as of #5 out of principle even though I was primarily enjoying the series. There are a number of celebrities, products companies and institutions I avoid supporting whenever possible for various reasons. Though it's not something I get fanatical about. |
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Jul 17, 2015 10:46:20 GMT -5
It doesn't effect how I evaluate their work in any way. Agree 100%. I'm a huge fan of (the work of) numerous artists who ran the gamut from flawed to monstrous in the way they conducted their personal lives: James Brown, Ray Charles, Buddy Rich, Errol Flynn, Orson Welles, Elvis, John Lennon, Jimmy Page, and on and on. People are messy, disappointing, often vile creatures. The work must stand on its own. The alternative dismisses great swathes of history, experience, and enlightenment to the ultimate detriment of the culture.
Even the evil Dr. Mengele's horrific experiments yielded valuable data from which effective treatments were eventually derived. Having said that (and I may rightly be taken to task for it ), I think it is possible to venerate the work while condemning the man.
Much as I'd like to be able to, I can't totally separate what I learn about people from what they produce. Byrne turns out to be a jerk and a bit of a nutjob, and that's in the back of my mind when I view even his old work. Were Cosby's standup & albums some of the funniest stuff I've ever heard? Sure. Is it still funny? Of course. Can I enjoy it as much now, without even a twinge of sadness for the people he's accused of hurting? Unfortunately, some of that does creep in. I'm not going to advocate burning his old records, and I'll still listen to them, but I can totally understand TV networks and theme parks not wanting to be associated with his old shows or his image, because the tarnish rubs off onto them. The work of a lifetime now has an asterisk next to it, because his personal behavior was so loathsome.
As to Mengele, consider yourself taken to task. No advancement was worth the horrors he perpetrated. Every scrap of paper he ever wrote on should have been burned.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil Maurice on Jul 17, 2015 15:56:09 GMT -5
consider yourself taken to task. I accept that. I wish I'd chosen a different example to make the point. I have neither the desire nor the stomach to defend it. Withdrawn. |
|
|
|
Post by DE Sinclair on Jul 17, 2015 16:14:09 GMT -5
consider yourself taken to task. I accept that. I wish I'd chosen a different example to make the point. I have neither the desire nor the stomach to defend it. Withdrawn. No worries. It's not like you said you'd "friend" him on Facebook or put him on your Christmas card list. |
|
|
|
Post by Nowhere Man on Jul 17, 2015 17:19:10 GMT -5
There are several artists that I've lost interest in because of their behavior, but I'd never advocate erasing history. I will never again have a desire to watch one of Cosby's specials, and certainly not The Cosby Show given the moral fiber of the character he played in that show, but I wouldn't want them to burn the master tapes. The main reason is that you never know what you can learn from history, particularly by studying how people present themselves and how they actually are.
I despise the Rebel Flag and all it stands for (Being from the South makes this personal for me) but I think the idea of going back and removing the flag from old episodes of The Dukes of Hazard is the height of knee-jerk idiocy. As cartoony as that show was, it was a fairly accurate representation of what was acceptable in the South in the late 70's and early 80's. At least in terms of iconography. Manipulating historic facts, even in seemingly trivial cases, is never a good thing for those of us interested in the truth.
|
|
|
|
Post by dupersuper on Jul 17, 2015 19:29:25 GMT -5
What do we do with this? How does - or should - it affect the way we evaluate their work? Personally such things don't effect how I "evaluate their work". It may cause me to interpret it differently depending on the specifics, but I evaluate the work (new and old), on its own merit. however such controversy or new info will occasionally cause me to reevaluate how much, if at all I support their work going forward. For example, I dropped new Capt. America as of #5 out of principle even though I was primarily enjoying the series. There are a number of celebrities, products companies and institutions I avoid supporting whenever possible for various reasons. Though it's not something I get fanatical about. What did Cap do? |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Jul 17, 2015 20:05:23 GMT -5
They still play Michael Jackson on the radio, and folks still dance along.
|
|
), I think it is possible to venerate the work while condemning the man.
