Very thoughtful article about how we relate to artists found to have serious character faults. It is one thing when their psychological issues harm only themselves but when they harm others, such as Alice Munro's daughter or Joan Crawford's kids, it is another story. Having been a family therapist working with sex trauma issues, I can look at them from the clinical perspective I had while working.
But, then there are all the antisemitic actors, writers, directors, etc. I cannot stomach them.
I’m Jewish and I’ve never had any trouble with antisemitic writers like Celine and TS Eliot as long as I otherwise liked their work. Maybe I’m an outlier but I know Philip Roth loved Celine.
Very good point. It reminds me of a horse of a totally different color; I had a conversation with my dear dear friend from Schul (she is like an extra Bubbe to our 8y son and like a Bubbe to me too now that my own passed away years ago). We talked about the Norwegian author Jostein Gaarder and “Sophie’s World”. And I said that I had thought about reading it aloud for my husband or as audio book (yes we actually read physical books aloud lol) because it would give him a basis for philosophy in an easy accessible way and he is also very much that person who doesn’t have the need to dive in too academically after work (tax accountant), but would still provide a good foundation also for our discussions. (I’m a theological scholar and in Denmark that means philosophy on academic level and often in original language is part of study and also I’m a very nerdy person the more “dry” the better lol.) She replied that we just needed to be careful because of his statements about Israel etc. And I agree if it was to use eg for academic purposes that one need to make sure not to use skewed material as much as possible. And I haven’t read it for about 15 years and have to revisit it. But this is only one work of an author and I think it is important to remember that no matter what people are writing/painting etc they’re still people with opinions and ideas and sometimes their work can still be valuable wether because it makes you happy/sad/angry or whatever emotion.
(This conversation took place around ultimate October 2023 so of course it also happened upon the still “raw wound” of oct 7th and she is an artist painter/sculptor herself)
Some years ago the Danish authorities declassified some files containing information about Danish nazi sympathizers, among them was a quite known actor from older Danish movies especially from 50s and 60s called Morten Korch after the instructor which often portrays Denmark as this idyllic countryside place with farms and villages and the good versus the bad is easy to find and always ends well. Most of people my generation and older have grown up with them (I guess all people born before the internet). and I remember my chock finding out his antisemitism and quite national socialistic tendencies because he always played the roles of the sweet elder guy in these “Denmark my country” movies. And now it makes SO much sense that a person who really loves DENMARK is on this national socialism, because its focus point is on exactly that: the national our country (the ‘flaw’ is of course that Jews came to Denmark more than 400 years ago and in general are quite well integrated and we are an absolute minority, but thinking about the context of Danish guest workers etc in exactly this period might have contributed to this too).
Sorry for this long post but I just came these thoughts :-)
So we should assume that all artists are broken, feel sorry for them and condone their immorality by supporting their work? 🤔 Humans have the ability to discern right from wrong so if they choose wrong, they made a choice, and like all citizens, pay the price. If they aren't held responsible, they end up spreading wrong messages to the public, much it's like spreading a virus and infecting others with their skewed thinking. They depend on the public to support them so essentially if the public has a higher level of morality, they will no longer be interested in supporting the person's work. The problem is that society does not have a better level of morality. I would think there are enough healthy artists in the world I'd rather support than lunatics like Watty who's just another prick in the wall. And I feel sorry for Alice's daughter. That's just the worst kind of betrayal. Siding with the perpetrator is unhealthy. You can't separate the person from the art like you can't separate water from ice.
This is the best piece I have read—and probably will ever read—on the topic. And yes, what ABOUT Skinner’s father?! He could have acted to stop the abuse when it was actually happening but didn’t.
In college, I knew someone who had been sexually abused by a brother-in-law (she was the youngest of many kids) when she was nine. She said that she was able to recover because her entire family sided with her and made sure the abuser was prosecuted. Part of his sentence was that for the rest of his life, he would not be allowed to work with children. My friend said that this sentence made her feel effective, rather than just a victim—that she and her family were helping other children.
I really can’t comprehend acting as Munro and Skinner’s father did. It’s inhuman.
Great piece. I share a similar response, especially to this:
“But we should approach the private life of artists as a good psychoanalyst would, not to judge, but to understand.”
It seems to me that to cancel her work, now, would be yet another form of denial. My curiosity about her work has only increased. And I feel terribly for the daughter, Andrea, as well as the other siblings. But it sure seems like an opportunity for better understanding of “the complicit mother.”
I also hate how quick we are to throw out art. If inventors of medical cures are found to be of poor moral character, do we stop taking their medicine? Of course not.
Her story How I met my husband always stays with me. I always noticed a lack of empathy in her characters but I took this as showing the reader the moral complexity of humans...but now I need to reread her. But I am si bummed about this. But them again, I will still read her. And I always thought she was underrated
I could be wrong about Monro’s reputation. it’s just a feeling I have, but I’m pretty sure it’s largely correct. And I certainly didn’t mean to be piling on her. For me, the news is surprising, but hasn’t changed my opinion of her work or my willingness to read it. What’s actually interesting to me more than what happened in her family is the way that readers are responding to it and that’s really my subject.
I don't think readers will ever be able to separate her art from this crime from now on. Oh, and yes re: her father. It's madness. He not only sent her back but sent her sister to watch over her? Madness.
I never thought that Alice Munro was unknown outside of literary circles but perhaps that's true. I feel like now everyone is saying, "I never liked her anyway," as if this news gives them permission. It really is a tragic day for Canadian literature. An icon has been sullied, and of course the underlying question remains, who else was in on the secret? It's devastating that her daughter carried this weight all her life. I hope this disclosure brings her some much needed peace.
Point taken on Woody Allen. Though I think by virtually any standards, the way the Soon Yi match occurred was a little disturbing, if not criminal and maybe enough to turn off some viewers of his work.
My issue with Allen is not so much what happened with Soon Yi, even though it was disturbing at the start. But they are still married, some twenty-plus years later.
I do take issue, though, with how he depicts women in many of his films. They often feature nubile young women who are not only desirable but set up as wiser and morally superior to older women, whom Allen too often depicts as pretentious, dominating shrews. As an older woman myself, I choose not to watch films where people like me are treated so one-dimensionally—and not in a good way.
(For the record, I also think it’s unlikely that he sexually abused his young step-daughter. There has never been any whisper of an accusation from anyone else of anything like that happening.)
I agree with most of your points--this is a thoughtful analysis. The fable of the two monks is excellent! I do have one objection, though, regarding Woody Allen. For Godsakes, the man isn't guilty of anything, he was found innocent by two police inquiries. He married a much younger woman (with whom he is still married a quarter of a century later), who was the daughter of his lover--maybe not admirable, but, not a crime.
Wow, I’m sorry to hear you had to go through this. And, in a case such as yours, I’d certainly understand why you might feel alienated from Munro. I’m glad, though, that you have found support and a place to feel free to express yourself.
Very thoughtful article about how we relate to artists found to have serious character faults. It is one thing when their psychological issues harm only themselves but when they harm others, such as Alice Munro's daughter or Joan Crawford's kids, it is another story. Having been a family therapist working with sex trauma issues, I can look at them from the clinical perspective I had while working.
But, then there are all the antisemitic actors, writers, directors, etc. I cannot stomach them.
I’m Jewish and I’ve never had any trouble with antisemitic writers like Celine and TS Eliot as long as I otherwise liked their work. Maybe I’m an outlier but I know Philip Roth loved Celine.
Very good point. It reminds me of a horse of a totally different color; I had a conversation with my dear dear friend from Schul (she is like an extra Bubbe to our 8y son and like a Bubbe to me too now that my own passed away years ago). We talked about the Norwegian author Jostein Gaarder and “Sophie’s World”. And I said that I had thought about reading it aloud for my husband or as audio book (yes we actually read physical books aloud lol) because it would give him a basis for philosophy in an easy accessible way and he is also very much that person who doesn’t have the need to dive in too academically after work (tax accountant), but would still provide a good foundation also for our discussions. (I’m a theological scholar and in Denmark that means philosophy on academic level and often in original language is part of study and also I’m a very nerdy person the more “dry” the better lol.) She replied that we just needed to be careful because of his statements about Israel etc. And I agree if it was to use eg for academic purposes that one need to make sure not to use skewed material as much as possible. And I haven’t read it for about 15 years and have to revisit it. But this is only one work of an author and I think it is important to remember that no matter what people are writing/painting etc they’re still people with opinions and ideas and sometimes their work can still be valuable wether because it makes you happy/sad/angry or whatever emotion.
(This conversation took place around ultimate October 2023 so of course it also happened upon the still “raw wound” of oct 7th and she is an artist painter/sculptor herself)
Some years ago the Danish authorities declassified some files containing information about Danish nazi sympathizers, among them was a quite known actor from older Danish movies especially from 50s and 60s called Morten Korch after the instructor which often portrays Denmark as this idyllic countryside place with farms and villages and the good versus the bad is easy to find and always ends well. Most of people my generation and older have grown up with them (I guess all people born before the internet). and I remember my chock finding out his antisemitism and quite national socialistic tendencies because he always played the roles of the sweet elder guy in these “Denmark my country” movies. And now it makes SO much sense that a person who really loves DENMARK is on this national socialism, because its focus point is on exactly that: the national our country (the ‘flaw’ is of course that Jews came to Denmark more than 400 years ago and in general are quite well integrated and we are an absolute minority, but thinking about the context of Danish guest workers etc in exactly this period might have contributed to this too).
Sorry for this long post but I just came these thoughts :-)
So we should assume that all artists are broken, feel sorry for them and condone their immorality by supporting their work? 🤔 Humans have the ability to discern right from wrong so if they choose wrong, they made a choice, and like all citizens, pay the price. If they aren't held responsible, they end up spreading wrong messages to the public, much it's like spreading a virus and infecting others with their skewed thinking. They depend on the public to support them so essentially if the public has a higher level of morality, they will no longer be interested in supporting the person's work. The problem is that society does not have a better level of morality. I would think there are enough healthy artists in the world I'd rather support than lunatics like Watty who's just another prick in the wall. And I feel sorry for Alice's daughter. That's just the worst kind of betrayal. Siding with the perpetrator is unhealthy. You can't separate the person from the art like you can't separate water from ice.
This is the best piece I have read—and probably will ever read—on the topic. And yes, what ABOUT Skinner’s father?! He could have acted to stop the abuse when it was actually happening but didn’t.
In college, I knew someone who had been sexually abused by a brother-in-law (she was the youngest of many kids) when she was nine. She said that she was able to recover because her entire family sided with her and made sure the abuser was prosecuted. Part of his sentence was that for the rest of his life, he would not be allowed to work with children. My friend said that this sentence made her feel effective, rather than just a victim—that she and her family were helping other children.
I really can’t comprehend acting as Munro and Skinner’s father did. It’s inhuman.
Great piece. I share a similar response, especially to this:
“But we should approach the private life of artists as a good psychoanalyst would, not to judge, but to understand.”
It seems to me that to cancel her work, now, would be yet another form of denial. My curiosity about her work has only increased. And I feel terribly for the daughter, Andrea, as well as the other siblings. But it sure seems like an opportunity for better understanding of “the complicit mother.”
I also hate how quick we are to throw out art. If inventors of medical cures are found to be of poor moral character, do we stop taking their medicine? Of course not.
We need art too.
Her story How I met my husband always stays with me. I always noticed a lack of empathy in her characters but I took this as showing the reader the moral complexity of humans...but now I need to reread her. But I am si bummed about this. But them again, I will still read her. And I always thought she was underrated
I could be wrong about Monro’s reputation. it’s just a feeling I have, but I’m pretty sure it’s largely correct. And I certainly didn’t mean to be piling on her. For me, the news is surprising, but hasn’t changed my opinion of her work or my willingness to read it. What’s actually interesting to me more than what happened in her family is the way that readers are responding to it and that’s really my subject.
Great post.
I don't think readers will ever be able to separate her art from this crime from now on. Oh, and yes re: her father. It's madness. He not only sent her back but sent her sister to watch over her? Madness.
I never thought that Alice Munro was unknown outside of literary circles but perhaps that's true. I feel like now everyone is saying, "I never liked her anyway," as if this news gives them permission. It really is a tragic day for Canadian literature. An icon has been sullied, and of course the underlying question remains, who else was in on the secret? It's devastating that her daughter carried this weight all her life. I hope this disclosure brings her some much needed peace.
Point taken on Woody Allen. Though I think by virtually any standards, the way the Soon Yi match occurred was a little disturbing, if not criminal and maybe enough to turn off some viewers of his work.
My issue with Allen is not so much what happened with Soon Yi, even though it was disturbing at the start. But they are still married, some twenty-plus years later.
I do take issue, though, with how he depicts women in many of his films. They often feature nubile young women who are not only desirable but set up as wiser and morally superior to older women, whom Allen too often depicts as pretentious, dominating shrews. As an older woman myself, I choose not to watch films where people like me are treated so one-dimensionally—and not in a good way.
(For the record, I also think it’s unlikely that he sexually abused his young step-daughter. There has never been any whisper of an accusation from anyone else of anything like that happening.)
I agree with most of your points--this is a thoughtful analysis. The fable of the two monks is excellent! I do have one objection, though, regarding Woody Allen. For Godsakes, the man isn't guilty of anything, he was found innocent by two police inquiries. He married a much younger woman (with whom he is still married a quarter of a century later), who was the daughter of his lover--maybe not admirable, but, not a crime.
Great post and agree that Alice Munro is overrated as a short story writer.
Wow, I’m sorry to hear you had to go through this. And, in a case such as yours, I’d certainly understand why you might feel alienated from Munro. I’m glad, though, that you have found support and a place to feel free to express yourself.