PBS高端访谈:更新艺术消费的道德标准（在线收听）

JOHN YANG: In this MeToo era, there is artistic question to consider: How do we think about Charlie Rose interviews, Miramax movies, or "Cosby Show" reruns? In other words, should we separate the art from the artist? Earlier this week, the influential rapper XXXTentacion was murdered in Florida. Critics and fans call him a gifted artist, but he had also been awaiting trial on various criminal charges. So, what do we make of his music and of the work of other artists whose behavior has been called into question? Tonight, "New Yorker" music critic Amanda Petrusich shares her Humble Opinion on how we should answer those questions.

AMANDA PETRUSICH, "The New Yorker": For decades, if not centuries, art critics have repeated an odd dictum: Always separate the art from the artist. It's a funny rule, because so much of what's been canonized as triumphant or profound work is considered successful in part because it is personal. In my experience, if we can't find the humanity in something, it means far less to us. As a music critic, a huge part of my job consists of contextualizing a song or album in its cultural moment and on a creative continuum, figuring out how it works and what it means in relation to everything around it. But, according to the old rules, the artist himself who he is, what he does, how he behaves, what he believes, should remain off-limits. It's become increasingly obvious that this way of thinking is outdated and dangerous. We can't simply cleave a song from the consciousness that created it because we like it, or because it's fun to dance to, or because we don't want to reckon with the idea that bad people can make beautiful things. It's on me to consider the ethical implications of my fandom. This means disavowing the work of artists who have been credibly or repeatedly accused of heinous crimes or whose behavior over time indicates some deep moral fissure. The streaming service Spotify briefly banned music by two artists who have been accused of horrifying physical and sexual violence, the R&B singer R. Kelly and the rapper XXXTentacion, on its curated play lists. I have enjoyed records by both of these artists. I have considered their work important and visionary. But I'm uncomfortable with supporting them financially and I'm even more uncomfortable with tacitly approving or tolerating violence against women. This is different than censorship. This is making a choice to be explicit about what we as listeners and consumers and fans will and will not accept. Spotify eventually restored those artists to its play lists, saying it didn't want to play judge and jury. These deliberations aren't simple. Is it easier to pretend that the art and artist who made it are distinct? Of course. Is the process of determining who is decent vs. who is monstrous going to be clean, or easy or fun? Certainly not. In my career, I have spoken with dozens of musicians, writers and filmmakers who have talked about the creative process as a kind of sense-making experience.

For many artists, it's simply how they figure out who they are and what they think. We can't pretend that songs or books or television shows just appear fully formed in the world, independent of any ideology or intention. The art is the artist. You don't get one without the other.

JOHN YANG: On the "NewsHour" online right now: What would it take to turn President Trump's vision of a space force branch of the armed services into reality? We asked experts to weigh in. That analysis and more is on our Web site, PBS.org/NewsHour.

约翰·杨：在这个MeToo时代，我们要考虑一个艺术问题：我们如何看待查理·罗斯名人访谈录、米拉麦克斯影片或“考斯比一家”的重播？换而言之，我们是否应该将艺术家与艺术相分离？本周早些时候，颇具影响力的说唱歌手XXXTentacion在佛罗里达州遭遇谋杀。评论家和影迷们称他是个天才艺术家，但他也一直在等待各种刑事指控的审判。那么，我们如何看待他的音乐以及那些行为失检的其他艺术家的作品？今晚，《纽约客》音乐评论家阿曼达·彼得鲁西奇在《管见所及》栏目，就如何回答这些问题发表了自己的看法。

阿曼达·彼得鲁西奇，《纽约客》：如果没有几个世纪，也有几十年了，艺术评论家们不断重复着一个奇怪的格言：永远要将艺术与艺术家分开。这个规则很有趣，因为很多胜利或深刻的工作被认为是成功的，部分原因是因为它是个人所做的。在我的经验中，如果我们找不到事物中的人性，这项事物对我们的意义就少了很多。作为一个音乐评论家，我工作中的一大部分是在一个文化瞬间内以及一个创造性的连续体中对一首歌曲或一张专辑进行语境化，弄清楚它如何运作以及对周围的一切意味着什么。但是，按照那些旧规则，艺术家自己是什么人，他做什么，他的行为，他的信仰，应该都不受限制。这种思维方式过时而危险，这点越来越明显。我们不能因为喜欢一首歌，或者因为舞跳得很有意思，或者因为我们不想考虑坏人能制造美丽事物的想法，就简单地把它从创作它的意识中分离开。我要考虑这些对我粉丝的伦理含义。这意味着对于那些曾经一再遭受可信指控，犯下滔天大罪的艺术家们，或者随着时间的推移，行为显示出一些深层次道德裂痕的艺术家们而言，他们的作品将被否定。流媒体服务平台“声田”直接将两名受到指控的艺术家，R&B歌手罗伯特·西尔维斯特·凯利和说唱歌手XXXTACACION从其平台的策展名单中除掉，因他们被指控犯有骇人听闻的身体暴力和性暴力罪行。我很欣赏这两位艺术家的唱片作品。我认为他们的工作重要而有远见。但我不愿意在经济上支持他们，我更不愿意默许或容忍他们对妇女的暴力行为。这与审查制度不同。这是一个明确的选择，我们作为听众、消费者和粉丝将会或不会接受。“声田”最终将这些艺术家的作品恢复到其播放列表中，称它不想扮演法官和陪审团的角色。这些深思熟虑并不简单。假装认为艺术和艺术家互为分离，是不是更容易？当然。这是不是决定谁得体，谁怪诞，谁干净，谁轻松或谁有趣的过程？当然不是。在我的职业生涯中，我曾与许多音乐家、作家和电影制作人有过交谈，他们说创造过程是一种感官体验。对许多艺术家来说，这就是他们如何理解自己和自己想法的方式。我们不能假装，歌曲、书籍或电视节目完全生长在独立于任何意识形态或意念的世界中。艺术就是艺术家。唇齿相依。

约翰·杨：“新闻一小时”线上正在播出：要将特朗普总统，发展空间军事力量这一愿景变为现实，需要什么？

我们请专家们进行考量。在我们的网站PBS.org/NewsHour上，您可以看到分析以及更多内容。