[Gráinne]

While R.Kelly, MJ, and say, Woody Allen are recent examples, this debate of art vs. artist's character is as old as, well, art.

For example, D.W. Griffith's Birth of a Nation. Made in 1915, it reflected the attitudes of its time and the 1860's, when it was set. Griffith's father was a colonel in the Confederate Army, and young David must have heard stories. I have no knowledge if D.W. himself was a racist, but do we condemn this movie or recognize it as an art form and jump in movie development?

Or Wagner, of the operas? He was a vicious anti-Semite. Should we never thrill to his "Ride of the Valkyries" again? It's one of my favorites-does that make me awful?

I believe in letting adults use their common sense in what they want to read, hear, watch, etc., and don't want some outside group telling me what I cannot show my children (who have seen BOAN and heard Wagner performed). They realize both Griffith and Wagner were products of their time and place.

If we as a people go down the road of banning things left and right because of the artist's actions, or-and it's not a huge jump to monuments and statues-because the subject didn't have the "right" opinions based on 2019 standards, then we are on a perilous road indeed where we are told what to think and what is "right". Dissension will be punished. There are a few societies, none of which are/were pleasant to live in, in which that was tried.