influence the opinion you have of the work the artist does?
Could a complete monster - somebody you despise beyond all compare - paint a picture that you might find beautiful beyond compare?
Or does the ugliness of the artist taint the quality of the finish work of art?
2006-09-22 04:34:03 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
I look at the art, not the artist. This is especially true when it comes to a musician.
2006-09-22 04:38:38 · answer #1 · answered by Diesel Weasel 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I would love to be able to say that i look at the art not the artist but, I will not support certain artists who say, look at child porn or molest children, goes around raping people. Other than stuff like that, I can usually look at the art not the artist.
2006-09-22 12:10:38 · answer #2 · answered by ~*~frankie~*~ 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If all I'm doing is looking at it or listening to it, no I don't have a problem with appreciating some dirty bastard's work. I would not, however, spend money on his stuff if I thought he would derive any profit from it.
2006-09-22 11:45:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes...reputation counts
Absolutely !
I don't understand what the artist's looks have to do with hie / her art.
2006-09-22 11:40:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
tricky question, a painting by charles manson, or by O.J, then one by a child, ok if not know before hand, would chose on concept of the beauty
2006-09-22 12:31:07 · answer #5 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
ART IS ARTIST, EVEN THE MOST HIDEOUS MONSTER HAS BEUATY SOMEWHERE IN THEIR SOUL..
2006-09-22 12:23:23 · answer #6 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋