rubberdingyrapids
Well-known member
http://popbitch.com/home/2016/01/21/all-u-can-stomach/
i was reading this post on popbitch about the new r kelly album and wondering about how messy this can actually get.
in rap, there are probably lots of artists who rap about all sorts of nasty behaviour, but in real life, might actually be pretty decent people (though obv they might also not be, which makes this less of a conflict, but still potentially more troubling). in other genres, it might be the opposite. im not sure how far to take it tbh. with r kelly, i suppose you could have once separated the man from his music, but its harder when he keeps singing about it and you have no choice but to imagine who hes singing these songs about/to (OTOH, it seems weird to suggest that as he has ben accused of sleeping with teenage girls, he should stop singing about it - his songs have mostly always been about sex, they are not explicitly about teenage girls).
its also tougher to do when the audience wants less of a boundary between the public and private persona of an artist, and there is a certain cultural competition for raising the bar in who can be the most morally challenging, or the most flagrant. we seem to crave purported 'honesty', no matter how nasty that might be. i had some issues listening to morrissey for a long time after he was so candid about his views on immigration, englishness, and nationality, etc, but have eventually gone back to listening to the smiths etc (mainly if i stopped listening to ever artist who has declared xenophobic/racist opinions, i would probably not listen to very much music). is there anyone you can no longer listen to for non-musical reasons?
i was reading this post on popbitch about the new r kelly album and wondering about how messy this can actually get.
in rap, there are probably lots of artists who rap about all sorts of nasty behaviour, but in real life, might actually be pretty decent people (though obv they might also not be, which makes this less of a conflict, but still potentially more troubling). in other genres, it might be the opposite. im not sure how far to take it tbh. with r kelly, i suppose you could have once separated the man from his music, but its harder when he keeps singing about it and you have no choice but to imagine who hes singing these songs about/to (OTOH, it seems weird to suggest that as he has ben accused of sleeping with teenage girls, he should stop singing about it - his songs have mostly always been about sex, they are not explicitly about teenage girls).
its also tougher to do when the audience wants less of a boundary between the public and private persona of an artist, and there is a certain cultural competition for raising the bar in who can be the most morally challenging, or the most flagrant. we seem to crave purported 'honesty', no matter how nasty that might be. i had some issues listening to morrissey for a long time after he was so candid about his views on immigration, englishness, and nationality, etc, but have eventually gone back to listening to the smiths etc (mainly if i stopped listening to ever artist who has declared xenophobic/racist opinions, i would probably not listen to very much music). is there anyone you can no longer listen to for non-musical reasons?