XXXtentacion: Should we separate artists’ work from their personal controversies?
- Ally Zhu
- Jun 27, 2018
- 6 min read
Today, I faced a dilemma when I was going through my Spotify favorites. Catalyzed by the recent death of XXXtentacion, I started pondering the ethics of listening to “SAD!” and “Jocelyn Flores” –––– music created by a man of questionable principle: mired with allegations of domestic abuse, the floridan rapper was the baddest of the bad boys.
Should we separate artists’ work from their personal controversies?
In truth, before XXXtentacion’s death, I had never even heard of him before. But his murder got press coverage, and coupled with my curiosity (and evidently everyone else’s because his music blew up even more), I ended up with a couple new Spotify favorites along with some new moral musings.
For me, the answer to this question has significant grey area, and must be separated into categories of whether we should and whether we actually can.
As a society, I think we should always attempt to separate the artwork from the artist. For groundbreaking work that deserves respect, it is in our best interest to reap the fruits of this achievement and give deserved credit for it too, as this celebration can benefit us as a society in our constant search for social, artistic and scientific progress. For example, would we and should we reject Newton’s findings (or more realistically, strip Newton of all credit he deserves –– such as naming laws after him) if it is uncovered he lived as a child molester, rapist and murderer? The answer I like to assume we would agree to is no, and that should be applied to all great works regardless of category. However, I believe this cannot be done at the expense of other, perhaps even more important battles that we as society must face: battles such as fighting a culture sustaining domestic abuse, racism, misogyny, and homophobia.
In some instances, I believe by supporting an artist’s work, we are also championing their contentious beliefs and actions. How do we honor an artist’s work without honoring the artist? In the cases that the line between respect for a work and respect for its artist becomes hard to delineate, I believe we must relinquish our attachment to their art for the sake of our social battles.
This of course is where the grey area gets even more subjective –– when and when not can we delineate this line between support for an art and support for an artist? We must face the question of whether we actually can separate an artist from their controversies.
It depends on numerous aspects –– the social atmosphere that gave way to the creation of this artwork, the profession and category of work, how this artist is presented to the public (whether they are the face of their work, or perhaps they have more of a “puppet master” role where no directly associations are made between the artwork and the artist). For example: the profession of a film director –– I can say I respect Manhattan as a landmark in movie history without demonstrating respect for Woody Allen’s moral choices. But the case of Harvey Weinstein gets more complicated, because in addition to sexual abuse, Weinstein has become a symbol representing the reign of male directors in Hollywood and their abuse of power, and supporting his films would indirectly support this hegemony. In another hypothetical example such as that Van Gogh is found to be a rapist, I would very easily be able to say I respect his gorgeous use of colors and his bold brushstrokes without extending this respect to him as a person. For Van Gogh and Woody Allen, the line between artwork and personage can be clearly delineated.
This becomes harder for me personally in some cases, like the profession of acting–– a successful actor is one where his entire persona, if not existence, becomes the character. In these cases, it is sometimes impossible to separate Cole Sprouse from Jughead (Riverdale), like it is impossible to separate the sexual abuser side of Kevin Spacey from Congressman Frank Underwood (House of Cards). As a result, however much I wish I am able to say I respect Kevin Spacey’s acting without extending this respect to him as a person, it becomes a lot more complicated, questionable, and uncomfortable.
I draw on specific cases as testimony to how the sheer number of aspects to this question entails that each situation requires a different answer. As follows, there are also cases where I can definitively say the artwork and the artist cannot be separated. And XXXtentacion, after much deliberation, I believe is one of those cases.
Supporting an artist’s work elevates the artist as someone worthy of attention. In the case of an artist mired in controversy, I think that is not problematic as long as we acknowledge that attention for their artwork does not entail supporting the artist himself as someone whose values are worthy of attention. But this is where I believe XXXtentacion becomes contentious: his rise to acclaim was so irrevocably linked to his domestic abuse charges that it becomes hard to dictate where this public attention goes. The rapper’s allegations fueled his persona as an authentic bad boy, and his music took upon a dimension that it did not have before. He got press coverage, became infamous, and his music hit the charts. In that sense, XXXtentacion’s controversial personage is embedded in his artwork. And in other words, we physically cannot separate the artist and his personal controversies.
Don’t get me wrong, I fucking vibed with his music and I adore how modern hip hop and rap capitalizes on this feeling of being “illegal” as a means to captivate its audience. It’s exciting to feel that way, especially when you feel like the world is your oyster and the night is still young. But there must still be a limit as to what we as society accept as okay; I question the misogyny, racism and homophobia in a lot of music I listen to yet I rest knowing that a lot of it is understood (most of the time) as play-pretend ––– as an artist building a personage. But I cannot tolerate an artist successfully passing domestic abuse as another “personage-building” opportunity. XXXtentacion’s work becoming famous as a result of his infamy is an instance where domestic abuse has successfully been used as another PR stunt for a badass name. The Floridian rapper capitalized on his crime to pave the path of his success and he’s not the only one: Kodak black, Tay-k, are all success stories of this kind of characterization.
Thus, giving him attention establishes very unhealthy societal misconceptions that problems like domestic abuse can be wielded as just another successful means to an end. It has come to a point where XXXtentacion fans even harassed Ayala (the rapper’s partner who suffered from the domestic abuse) to the point where she was unable to go out of her home, had to quit her job, and was forced to close her GoFundMe account meant to raise money for her domestic abuse injuries. This is a case when fame for a work has promoted the artist to a status where he is immune to the consequences of a crime; instead of being rebuked, he is celebrated by his fans, and supporting his work only pays tribute to the fucked up system where controversy is the modern recipe for fame.
In XXXtentacion’s case, I believe we cannot separate the artist from his artwork — as much as I wish we could. I cannot listen to his music knowing that while it may be inspiring millions of degenerate youth, it is also setting incorrect societal norms popularizing intolerable acts as a means of getting from rags to riches. I cannot selfishly yield to a few moments of “good” music despite knowledge that doing so is proof that crimes like domestic abuse can lead not to consequences but abounds of fame. My friend @kevinzyang summarized it perfectly: it is up to listeners to choose music that reaches for the society they would like to see.
It is difficult to relinquish our attachment to art we love, but in the case, I must choose to do so for the sake of our social battles.
And so, with great sadness, I deleted the rapper’s legacy from my playlist.
Comments