Statues and Art?? Should we destroy art because of the immorality or decadence of the artist??

Posted on by Opher

Yesterday somebody damaged the statue produced by Eric Gill on the front of the BBC building.

It appears that the artwork was attacked because of Eric Gill’s sexual deviation (as revealed in his diaries). He committed incest with his daughters and sexually abused the family dog.

I do not think many people would defend the actions of this artist. Sexual abuse is not to be condoned. But those that invalidate the art he produced??

It seems that we are on a slippery slope here. Many artists have lived abhorrent lives while producing outstanding art and music.

Leadbelly was a committed murderer and rapist.

Picasso was a misogynist.

Dali supported Hitler and fascism.

Gaugin was a paedophile.

Caravaggio was a murderer.

The list could go on and on and on.. ……

Does this mean we have to analyse the lives of every artist, musician and writer for abhorrent behaviour? Should we destroy their work if we find unpleasant stuff?

Would we all agree on what was abhorrent?

It seems to me that all those statues of slavers, exploiters, profiteers, warmongers and politicians should be removed!! They represent repugnant values. But destroy them?? I think not. I’d put them in museums.

Destroying art feels like burning books to me!!

Surely we should separate the art from the artist? Surely we can use the art as a focus to discuss the views and actions of the artists?

Kavanaugh and Sexual Abuse.

Posted on by Opher

In terms of the sexual abuse situation. I can see both sides. Some women, for various reasons, do make false accusations. That is true.

But women have been abused for centuries by men like Bret Kavanaugh.

It has been going on through society. Powerful men have abused their situation. Abusive men have systematically abused with impunity. It was swept under the carpet and even seen as the norm. Abused women were ignored, not believed and even blamed for the abuse they suffered.

That has hopefully changed. Abuse should never be swept under the carpet.

Each case of abuse should be investigated. Each report of abuse should be listened to. IMO this has to be carried out sensitively. I do not say that the people claiming to have been abused should be completely believed. I think there should be a climate in which they are believed and listened to but in which there is the possibility that it is not true.

I also believe that the person accused should be innocent until proven guilty. For people to be dragged through courts without any evidence is simply wrong.

I just want a hell of a lot more of them found guilty – because many of them are.

Indoctrinating children with religious belief is child abuse!

Posted on by Opher

Freud findings indicated that the adult is unable to overcome the indoctrination that occurs during childhood.

If you fill a child’s head with religious ideas before they are old enough to rationalise they are stuck with it for life!

Our children should be free to grow up and make their own decisions when their brains have matured. To teach religion in school or madrassa is abuse.

To bring up a child with religious concepts that they cannot possibly understand is as much an abuse as physical or sexual abuse and just as long lasting in its harmful effects.

You don’t agree? Then read my controversial novel where the themes deal with the absurdity of religion – ‘The Antitheist’s Bible’