“I’m a bit sleepy tonight but when I wake up I’m going death con 3 on JEWISH PEOPLE I actually can’t be Anti Semitic because black people are actually Jew also You guys have toyed with me and tried to black ball anyone whoever opposes your agenda.”
This since-deleted tweet from October 8, 2022 resulted in Kanye “Ye” West being suspended from major social media platforms. In the months that followed, West was invited to many different podcasts and interviews, where he doubled down on his problematic ideology. He appeared in an interview with Alex Jones, a right-wing conspiracy theorist best known for denying the events of the Sandy Hook shooting in 2012. During the interview, West showed open admiration for Nazism and Adolf Hitler.
“I don’t like the word ‘evil’ next to Nazis, CNN says white people are evil Nazis,” West said. “I love Jewish people, but I also love Nazis…Every human being has something of value that they brought to the table, especially Hitler.”
Soon after these outrageous remarks were made, dialogues and discussions surrounding Kanye West’s artistic integrity began. Fans of Kanye West’s music were presented with a moral dilemma: is it harmful to continue listening to his music? Or can his art be separated from his character and ideology?
What Now?
“I guess the controversy recently has kind of steered me away from Kanye music, but I don’t think it’s ‘immoral’ by any means to continue enjoying it,” Finn Schwarz, a senior, said. “I think that’s because his music doesn’t contain the same messages or ideologies that he’s spouting on the internet right now, so you can separate his past work from who he is right now. My way of thinking about it is that if the art doesn’t perpetuate the bad stuff the artist did, it shouldn’t be dismissed as art.”
Who students consider to be problematic differs from person to person, but is generally considered a creator that has done something widely deemed as morally deficient. People respond in various ways, whether it be not supporting the artist’s content whatsoever, informing others of why the artist is problematic or choosing to do nothing at all.
When Clara Kornelis, a freshman, found out that Courtney Love, the lead singer of alternative rock band Hole, had a reputation that was tarnished by repeated controversy, she opted to stop listening almost completely. For example, Love took hard drugs throughout her time in the spotlight, which resulted in several stunts that ranged from taking heroin during pregnancy to being accused of physical assault.
“If you continue to support an artist by giving them money and giving them streams, it’s just showing them that they can keep doing all the terrible stuff they’ve been doing,” said Kornelis.
When deciding whether or not to support an artist, Kornelis encourages people to research the era of popularity to determine if the artists were doing what was then acceptable. In the case of Hole, Love’s actions went against the purpose of “riot grrl,” a musical movement from the ‘90s that spoke out against hate.
“There were a lot of other grunge and riot grrl bands that were not doing that,” Kornelis said. “A lot of the music in her scene was very against what she had done, and so it’s shocking that she would be so blatant about her racism and everything.”
Another important distinguishing factor is whether or not the artist is alive to profit from their work. If they are alive, they are benefitting from streams, merch, award shows and concerts. Julie Ellington, the head of Northwest Academy’s language department, thinks that the decision to expose a problematic artist’s work to others heavily depends on whether or not they’re still alive.
“To me it matters if they’re alive,” Ellington said. “It feels less bad to study Picasso and making him like a great of Cubism. Because he’s not receiving anything from that.”
Elizabeth Clarke, a sophomore, follows a similar line of thinking to Ellington when it comes to artists who have passed away, arguing that the artist’s financial benefit is a crucial factor.
“We briefly touched on this in English about problematic artists who are already dead, like a lot of writers we study in our English class,” said Clarke. “It’s kind of like the difference between Kanye and Michael Jackson, one of them will still benefit from your support and the other won’t. That kind of assumes that financial support is the determining factor with who you do and don’t listen to, which is up for debate. It definitely feels easier to consume art from a problematic artist if they aren’t around to reap the benefits.”
Some, such as Gibson McCoy, a junior, believe that it’s okay to admire a dead celebrity’s work as long as there’s an acknowledgement of their actions.
“I think it’s easier to learn about problematic artists when they’re dead because it’s easier to have the historical context around it and understand it better because of that,” McCoy said. “If it’s a modern artist like Kanye, you can’t really analyze their work from a historical [perspective] because the effects and influence they have hasn’t had time to have [observable] impact.”
The Impact of Social Media and Celebrity Culture
For modern celebrities, the consumer must consider the influence of social media and how it can be used to spread disinformation about people. For example, MIT found that false posts were 70% more likely to be shared than the truth.
“It’s really hard to tell if there’s something you need to take seriously or if it’s something someone just [says] because they don’t like the person,” El Cornelius, a freshman, said. “There really isn’t a way to tell, and you have to kinda take everything into consideration. It’s crazy that [stuff] people say on the internet just because they don’t like someone.”
Asher Fritts-Weeks, a freshman, gets most of his initial information from Twitter when learning about problematic artists. After dipping his toes in social media, he then turns to more reputable news sources to determine whether or not he should take the claims seriously. Kornelis agrees with this method, and cautions against solely using social media sites for news.
“Try to find [credible] sources, maybe who have actual victims of artists being interviewed,” said Kornelis.
If Cornelius learned that one of their favorite artists was doing something they deemed to be morally wrong, or if they saw their friends listening to a problematic artist, they would try to educate them on what this person has done.
“I’d probably tell them it was an issue, and I would hope they would have listened, but I can’t control it,” Cornelius said. “It’s their choice. [I also think] it’s very different [from] someone being aware of it and choosing to listen.”
Kornelis agrees with this method, but when considering what she would do if her favorite artist got canceled, she is unsure of what her approach would look like.
Tatum Wolfsmith, a junior, believes that she would respond positively to this approach. If somebody decided not to heed this advice and continue to listen to a problematic artist, Wolfsmith says it might tip her off to their values being different.
“At the end of the day it’s their decision,” said Wolfsmith. “I might think a little differently of them. I think sometimes it just shows where people’s morals are at, or what their really strong values are, and sometimes if they don’t align with mine, that might be a place where we just can’t have deeper conversations. But, at the end of the day, it’s their choice.”
On the other hand, Riley Olson, a sophomore, doesn’t appreciate having other people’s morals pushed onto her.
“I think it’s fine if they say it in a way that’s like ‘just so you know, that person did xyz,’” Olson said. “But if it’s in a way like ‘you shouldn’t be listening to them’ then it kind of crosses a line of forcing your opinions onto other people.”
Etienne Bergstrom, a junior, has the same perspective, believing that educating people isn’t a bad thing as long as you aren’t directly telling them what to do.
“If someone is unknowingly ignorant about an artist it’s fine to educate them about what that artist has done, but I don’t think you have the right to make the decision for them,” Bergstrom said.
Sebastian Moreno-Comstock, a senior, thinks the decision should be both left up to the deciding individual and taken up artist by artist. He opted to continue listening to West’s music after his controversial comments came out.
“I guess it’s a tough situation because like, imagine your personal favorite artist turned out to be a huge a**hole,” said Moreno-Comstock. “Would you be willing to sacrifice art that’s special to you just because the artist was a d***head? It’s a personal question and I don’t [think] there’s a right or wrong answer, everyone can make up their own minds about it, but I don’t think people have the right to tell other people that their choice is wrong or immoral.”
Cassie Hu, a senior, agrees with him. While West is not one of her favorite artists, she believes an outsider is not in a position to judge the consumer. However, when the artist’s ideology appears in their work, she urges people to stop listening.
“Are you willing to sacrifice your favorite art for the sake of not supporting Kanye, or do you value his work enough to justify streaming it on Spotify and giving him financial support?” Hu said. “I don’t think it’s okay to judge people [based] on their answer to those questions. However, in the case where certain artists’ work contain the same problematic ideas or behavior, then I do think it’s indefensible. If you can see their ideology in their art, then it’s problematic to continue consuming it.”
Ye
Celebrities are often held to a high standard when it comes to being unproblematic or inoffensive due to the sheer size of the platforms many of them hold. The influence they have over others and the popularity they’ve gained makes people more susceptible to take their comments seriously.
On Twitter, rapper Boosie BadAzz heavily criticized West for using his platform to the detriment of Black people.
“DAM @kanyewest U JUST GOING TO KEEP USING YOUR PLATFORM TO SH*T ON YOUR OWN RACE,” BadAzz tweeted on October 4, 2022.
Do celebrities have a moral responsibility to advocate for good in the world? Kanye West is one of the most celebrated hip-hop artists of all-time. Even after his most recent comments on social media, he’s still worth around $400 million. He’s an artistic idol to millions of fans, and therefore has a voice greater than many. He’s also a rapper, not an activist. It’s the fact that he chose to enter a hateful, discriminatory conversation that makes his actions problematic. West isn’t obligated to be a role model, but recklessness under such an important platform shouldn’t be permitted either.
“It’s just enforcing the idea that you could be such a terrible person, and you’re gonna be rich and famous anyway, which is true most of the time, but it shouldn’t be,” an anonymous source said.
This anonymous source, referring to West’s recent comments, believes that cancel culture has been exaggerated by social media’s transformation into supposed “legitimate journalism.”
“Pertinent questions have been raised repeatedly over the last decade through a refined focus on our hyper-connectedness via social media via smartphones, which, in my opinion, have exacerbated and amplified these complex social problems,” a different anonymous source said. “The world born out of these intersections has led to media polarization and the weaponization of journalism.”
They say that although West’s comments have raised several red flags, they aren’t surprising given West’s history of insensitive comments.
“I cannot speak to why he said and did the things he has done,” they said. “However, I know many were hurt by his actions and words, that his statements against those of the Jewish faith were dog whistles to antisemitism. While these caught many off guard, they were not out of character.”
West’s hateful comments towards the Jewish faith weren’t the first time he has acted as a provocateur in the media. For instance, he falsely claimed that George Floyd died of a Fentanyl overdose in October 2020. Most recently, at his Paris Fashion Week show, he debuted shirts labeled with the words “White Lives Matter.”
Given West’s pattern of controversies, the source says they have trouble listening to his music.
For celebrities with such a large influence on the public, it’s important to discern whether their problematic opinions are a pattern of behavior, or if they’ve left their previous actions and beliefs in the past and moved on.
“Kanye West? Probably problematic before the fame,” said Cornelius. “But it’s also so amplified when you get to a certain spot of fame where [you think] that you can make someone say some toxic [stuff].”
If they were “problematic” before fame, or said problematic things a long time ago, then Fritts-Weeks thinks that it is a completely different game.
“If it was something smaller and they apologized or if it was something in the past before they were famous and had a very big presence… I think that’s when it’s fine to say ‘Oh it’s okay you can still listen to them,’” said Fritts-Weeks.
When it comes to deciding which artists to support, students are mostly concerned with their own morals. Teachers, on the other hand, are in a more complicated position, as they are responsible for choosing which artists are taught in their classes.
The World of Teachers and Syllabi
In 2018, popular novelist and filmmaker Sherman Alexie was accused of sexual assault and misconduct. Alexie’s critically acclaimed novel, The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, was a staple of many middle and high schools’ literary curricula. However, after news broke about Alexie’s problematic actions, Northwest Academy, alongside many other schools, ultimately decided to stop teaching his work.
According to several statements from National Public Broadcasting, Alexie sexually harassed upwards of 10 women. Several of the women said that Alexie used his celebrity status in the writing community to make sexual advances. As a result of this, a scholarship originally named after the author was changed by the Institute of Native American Arts, and some schools dropped the book from their curriculums.
“It came out that he was abusing his position of power within the literary world of the publishing industry and he was promising certain things to a lot of Native American women authors, which was really exploitative,” Kyle Wiggins, the junior year English & Humanities teacher, said. “As a response, the school and other schools decided to remove Alexie’s books from our syllabi.”
Ellington, in regard to artists like Alexie, believes that purchasing and teaching his work in an educational setting is unnecessarily contributing to a problematic man’s further success.
“In continuing to say that he is the Native American author…the one we have to read, we are not only contributing to his wealth as a living artist, we are contributing to his social cache, and we’re basically saying it doesn’t matter that you have abused a bunch of women,” said Ellington.
Ellington says that labeling Alexie as the pre-eminent Native American author is only fueled by his silencing and abuse of other women. By holding him on a higher pedestal in education, we’re diminishing valuable female voices.
“Isn’t it a little ironic and shocking that we think you’re the only Indigenous author to read?” Ellington said. “Because you’ve been deliberately reducing and minimizing the careers of Native American women authors for your whole life.”
There are many factors at play when it comes to removing a problematic author from school syllabi. Jada Pierce, the senior English & Humanities teacher, sees financial compensation as a major factor in determining whether or not certain work should be removed from an academic setting.
“As an educator, you always have to ask yourself those questions because you’re having students buy books, and part of that money goes to support the artist,” Pierce said. “But if you’re talking about after an artist is dead, then it just becomes part of a history that, as long as you’re providing historical context to that person’s life, I think is totally okay [to teach].”
The cultural significance of the art is also a large factor in determining which works from the past are being taught by the school, as learning about Native American literature would be difficult without addressing Alexie in some way.
“In some cases, you’d have to teach certain voices, even though they’re problematic,” Pierce said. “Otherwise the history of that literature would be incomplete. Whether we like it or not, these were the voices that defined this part of this time.”
Wiggins also considers the artist’s profit to be a large contributor towards what he decides to teach. He believes that sharing the person’s work in the classroom, under a positive light, is an inherent appraisal of their art.
“If we teach [Alexie’s] books, because we’re talking about someone who’s still alive, are we sort of endorsing that person and their art by teaching it?” Wiggins said. “I think it’s a big factor whether or not they’re still profiting off of their work. Not the sole determining factor, but it’s a big factor.”
Katie Staggers, the head of the English & Humanities department, acknowledges this aspect of teaching a problematic artist, but also proposes that in an academic setting, there is still value in analyzing important work, no matter who the author is.
“Another factor is how powerful the work is,” Staggers said. “I think about how I think it will play in the classroom, whether students will be interested in it, whether it will be something that will grab them in one way or another, even if it grabs them in a way of being very frustrated with it. I mean, that’s one thing that I like about Machiavelli is, when you can be really interested in his work but hate him at the same time, I think that makes for a great discussion.”
Wiggins also recognizes that separating the art from the artist is something that is necessary in some cases.
“Can you separate the art and the artist? I don’t think you can,” Wiggins said. “Most people seem to find that impossible and irresponsible. But at the same time, I wonder if there’s a way to acknowledge and look completely at who the maker is, what they made, what message it conveys, and still talk responsibly about both art and artists.”
The “art vs artist” debate is an ongoing conversation in our society. Due to the moral ambiguity and overall subjective nature of the discussion, no concrete conclusions can be drawn, at least for now.
However, conversations about what our society deems as “tainted art” and whether or not their creators should continue to be acknowledged as meaningful artists are important for both individuals and teachers.
“We can’t just pretend [these pieces of art] didn’t exist or influence other writers and artists who went on to not do horrible things, right?” Pierce said. “Sherman Alexie did influence other writers, some in positive ways even though we know about the awful things that he’s done. I’m not going to teach his works, but I won’t shy away from teaching works that came after him, or were inspired by him.”
Reporting by Marlo Dabareiner, Keaton Marcus and Conor McGeady
Photo by Daniel Kulinski is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0
Leave a Reply