The Manchester Armchair Philosophers ask What Is The Relationship Between Art and Ethics?

Tweet

Tuesday 19th May 2015 – The Royal Oak Pub, Chorlton, Manchester. Our host, Mary Crumpton asked whether art and morality should go hand in hand. Should movies carry a moral message? Should paintings and sculpture make us think about how we live our lives? Should artists, writers, and composers live a moral life? Artist Eric Gill turned out to be a rapist who had spent much of his life molesting his own daughters and even the family dog. This was not discovered until after his death when his diaries revealed his sordid activity. Singer Gary Glitter proved to be a serial sex-offender, resulting in a general censorship of his once popular back-catalogue of music. Actor Leslie Grantham got his biggest roles after serving time for the murder of a taxi-driver. Should the artist live the life of a moral role model? Picasso was a notorious womanizer, and the general picture of artists as decadent Bohemians remains a strong one. Art can be highly influential on morals, religious and political beliefs, and our moods. Christian art such as stained glass window portraits of saints or life-sized statues depicting Jesus bleeding on the Cross clearly serve to influence the frame of mind of visitors to any church or cathedral in which they feature. Art is what we make of it. I may love a work of art without knowing anything of its origin, who created it or the purpose they intended it to serve. If I found that a work I loved was created by an ardent Nazi it might well change my perspective but should it mean total rejection of what the work meant to me before? The French Charlie Hesbo artists murdered by Islamic extremists for daring to caricature Mohammed were undoubtedly trying to generate controversy but got more than they bargained for. The attackers failed to accept a joke and any alternative viewpoint than their own, but their reaction was far more extreme than the art itself. Art can be pro-establishment or a work of protest as with the anti-Vietnam protest songs that dominated 1969’s Woodstock music festival or Tom Robinson’s anti-homophobic anthem, Sing If You’re Glad To Be Gay. Art can get an issue noticed beyond the party political broadcast. The writings of Voltaire influenced The French Revolution, Wagner’s operas helped to inspire Hitler. Many acquainted with such works are not driven in such directions. The movie, Birth Of A Nation is regarded as a landmark – the first true full length motion picture, but it sets up the Ku Klux Klan as its heroes. Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph Of The Will, which captures a Nuremberg Rally in all its spectacle, is praised for its cine-photography and direction, despite its unquestioning glorification of its subject matter. Governments use art for propaganda purposes, and not just in wartime. Advertisers do likewise. Street art and graffiti by artists like Banksy uses art as a guerrilla medium of political statement though to some it is little more than vandalism. Many artists worked for a commission. Michelangelo gave the papacy what it wanted in his work on the Sistine Chapel. Many wealthy property owners hired Gainsborough to paint them surrounded by their estates and property. Such artists can be said to serve the rich, powerful and governing establishment forces. Many schools of art have strict rules of what can or cannot be depicted and how. Dada grew in reaction to the horrors of World War One, replacing traditional images of order and uniformity with nonsense and chaos, randomness and anarchy. Duchamp famously took a gents toilet urinal, labeled it ‘Fountain’ and put in on display as a work of gallery art in New York. Within five years, Dada had competition from Surrealism, which demanded that art represent not just the random but the subconscious, especially the dream-scape within our minds. Salvador Dali veered between the two movements and his anarchic beliefs drew him into conflict with Surrealism’s leading advocate, Andre Breton. Artists are governed by social rules and laws, and by trends, and dominant factions even within their own academic schools, clubs and disciplines. Truly independent artists and mavericks are not unknown, with some artists intentionally breaking rules and causing a split from a leading movement to help foster their own reputations. Suppose you learn that an artist, writer, singer or composer you admire had a sordid past or becomes embroiled in a deeply distressing activity, such as child abuse or right wing extremism, would you immediately remove their books and CD’s from your collection, and tear up their paintings? Could you still listen to Gary Glitter’s Do You Wanna Be In My Gang? Disposing of art and artifacts we suddenly disapprove of takes on the tone of a Nazi book burning, or Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451. Asked if we would read a book written by a known killer, I realized that I have read work by Charles Bronson (not the actor) and Jimmy Boyle. Footballers may be lambasted in the media for loose morals if caught taking drugs, or having affairs but they are not obliged contractually to greater morality than bricklayers or office staff. Artists should similarly be no more restrained by moral demands on their lives than anyone else. It may be that an artist takes a stance of opposition to a particular political or social view so it might be seen as hypocritical if they don’t practice what they preach. Many artists have used prostitutes as models, largely as the prostitute is happy to be undressed for long periods of time if paid for it. Renoir and Toulouse Lautrec used prostitutes a lot both in their art and in their private indulgences. Sometimes our heroes behave in an inflammatory way that makes them fall from favor, but we later forgive them. Michael Jackson was surrounded by controversy most of his life, though child-sex allegations were ultimately dropped. His fan-base stood by him throughout. Eric Clapton lost fans when he openly expressed support for Enoch Powell after the notorious Rivers Of Blood speech, but such concerns about Clapton’s politics have now largely been forgotten. Architecture as an art is obviously influential on our lives as it shapes our homes, work-places and cities. Artifacts may be a mix of functional and aesthetically pleasing. A basic wooden table set to a suitable height to rest our papers or food upon are going to be less important to us or cared for than a hand-carved mahogany table with sculpted ornate wood-nymphs adorning its legs. Does a famous artist have any ethical obligations? Not necessarily. The artist is human, and it is up to the fickle public whether we accept or reject a work of art, or its creator in our lives. A comedian may make me laugh or fail to amuse me. Is it his fault or mine? Is it my moral sensibility that would put me off a sexist joke which others find hilarious? If my ethical thinking detaches me so much from the rest of an artist’s audience that I seem out of touch what does that say for my morals? There are lines that artists cross at their peril. A sportsman may be stripped of medals for steroid abuse; an artist dare no plagiarize or cheat. Forgery takes a degree of artistic skill and ingenuity, which can be both celebrated and condemned. Corporate ownership of art as a commercial asset has seen many famous works sell for high prices; a Van Gogh or Picasso can fetch £30 million or more in auction, while new artists struggle to find sponsors or early markets for their work. Much art and art criticism circulates for free online. Illegal file sharing and downloading of music and movies undermines the commercial value or targeted profits of much commercial art. Art is often controversial just to draw attention to itself as with Damien Hurst’s sliced cows in formaldehyde and Benetton advertising campaigns. The main thing with art is to look at it and learn from it. Take the time to think about what a painting, film, photograph, book, poem, or song says to you – see how it affects your morality, strengthening or conflicting with it. Only by not looking or listening can art not affect you – someone who engages with a single portrait for two hours may well take in greater moral value than someone who walks through an entire art gallery in half the time. Arthur Chappell