Art and Loathing - Johnny Depp / The Rolling Stones / Stray Cats & Philosophy

TokyoPortrait

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Dec 10, 2017
Posts
4,214
Location
Tokyo, Japan
Hi.

I meant to make a post about this a while ago. I think it was someone’s comment about Stray Cat Blues that made me think of the following article. Or, the following article made me think of someone's comment about Stray Cat Blues. Can't remember now.

Anyway, I never got around to it. But I just stumbled across the Team Johnny Depp thread,* that the time zone difference seems to have been keeping from my sight, and it reminded me again.

So, here's one idea about the moral problem of great art / yucky artist.

https://psyche.co/ideas/love-the-art-disgusted-by-the-artist-maybe-philosophy-can-help

And, for good measure, here’s the song. Which sounds so good, and is so despicable in subject matter. I sniggered out loud at the comment just a little down, that “This must be Bill Wyman’s favourite.”

But man, what's coming out in that left right separation sounds so right.





Pax/
Dean
* https://www.tdpri.com/threads/team-johnny-depp.1099135/
 

buster poser

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
May 1, 2018
Posts
6,590
Location
Tewa Land NM
Johnny Depp, artist. As evinced by... checks article again... yes, his role as goth Pinocchio because it made the author "feel things" as a teenager.

We are a long way out, y'all.
 

TokyoPortrait

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Dec 10, 2017
Posts
4,214
Location
Tokyo, Japan
Johnny Depp, artist. As evinced by... checks article again... yes, his role as goth Pinocchio because it made the author "feel things" as a teenager.

We are a long way out, y'all.
Hi.

No, I believe it was Constance Grady that felt things. About the movie.

Making people feel things is what art is supposed to do, isn't it, at least, one of the things it's supposed to do? I'd argue if it's not making people feel things, it's not succeeding as art.

But of course, that's not really what it's about either, is it, nor was it the point of my post.

Pax/
Dean
 

buster poser

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
May 1, 2018
Posts
6,590
Location
Tewa Land NM
Hi.

No, I believe it was Constance Grady that felt things. About the movie.

Making people feel things is what art is supposed to do, isn't it, at least, one of the things it's supposed to do? I'd argue if it's not making people feel things, it's not succeeding as art.

But of course, that's not really what it's about either, is it, nor was it the point of my post.

Pax/
Dean
:) Early a.m. generalized snark, my apologies. I just don't think he's much of an artist. If DDL was outed as a monster, it'd be more interesting dilemma for me, but if Depp's acting career had an analog in music, he'd be in Nickelback. Just tired of hearing about this cad.
 

Fearnot

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Posts
5,512
Location
Decatur, GA
I used to see Johnny Depp's band in the early 80s. They were a new wave jukebox when everyone else in the scene was playing originals. He's a good-looking hack.
 

Kandinskyesque

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Dec 6, 2021
Posts
1,114
Location
Scotland
Not just me that finds him really creepy?

Tom Cruise performing Stray Cat Blues would be pretty unbearable. 😆
He runs funny, especially the air chopping/hand knife thing.
I'd pay good money to see him being chased down the street by some Psychobillies circa 1980(ish) after a Stray Cats gig.

I'd pay double if you threw in Johnny Depp as well.
 

telemnemonics

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Posts
33,918
Age
62
Location
Maine
Actors as artists, mmmm I suppose because Im not the arbiter of all art.

Individuals angrily insist a woman wearing a mini skirt deserves to be gang assaulted.

Individuals angrily insist that the whole world should bow to their indoctrinated beliefs.

Individuals with the greatest anounts of money angrily insist that they know best and all the less well funded should obey their chosen doctrines.

Individuals see accusations made, and angrily find the accused guilty then proceed to try to hurt and harm the accused individual who may or may not have hurt and harmed someone.

Yes, the collective of humanity grows more and more angry...
 

THX1123

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Posts
1,025
Location
Gibsonville
Interesting article.

Philosophy is not likely to be of much palliative benefit to people whose foremost concern is judgment.

90% of the Internet's function in terms of social media appears to be allowing one's self to be pimped in exchange for a space that enables cheap individual validation via judgment.

It seems to me that the inability to separate art from the artist is, at best, judgment based on morality, and at worst sanctimonious.
 

telemnemonics

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Posts
33,918
Age
62
Location
Maine
Its also ironic that the psych prof (a man teaching morality at an all girls school BTW) refers to immoral acts by artists when art is itself an exploration dissection and commentary of/on morality.

Meanwhile he is paid by an institution created at a time when American parents traded their 12yo girls into marriages without the child brides permission, for the purpose of family reputation, fortune, land ownership, or even just two hogs and a donkey if thats all they could get for their child.
 

Papanate

Tele-Meister
Silver Supporter
Joined
Nov 11, 2018
Posts
318
Age
52
Location
New York
I don't think that much about Johnny Depp - I liked him in some of the Pirate Movies - haven't really followed outside of them - I think I saw Edward Scissorhands - didn't think much of it - What he done that people find offensive?
 

3fngrs

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
Oct 30, 2017
Posts
5,717
Location
Ohio
Not just me that finds him really creepy?

Tom Cruise performing Stray Cat Blues would be pretty unbearable. 😆
I've said it before, I'm sure he's a lizard under a fake human skin. Sometimes you can even see the lizard. Sort of like on the old TV show "V" when they'd start turning.

Or "Resident Alien."
 

THX1123

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Posts
1,025
Location
Gibsonville
Its also ironic that the psych prof (a man teaching morality at an all girls school BTW) refers to immoral acts by artists when art is itself an exploration dissection and commentary of/on morality.

Meanwhile he is paid by an institution created at a time when American parents traded their 12yo girls into marriages without the child brides permission, for the purpose of family reputation, fortune, land ownership, or even just two hogs and a donkey if thats all they could get for their child.
How is it ironic? I mean, in my view there should be distinction between the artist and the work. I also believe morality can arguably exist effectively independent of social constructs and institutions - otherwise how could art critique it?
 

telemnemonics

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Posts
33,918
Age
62
Location
Maine
How is it ironic? I mean, in my view there should be distinction between the artist and the work. I also believe morality can arguably exist effectively independent of social constructs and institutions - otherwise how could art critique it?
Ironic IMO to refer to "immoral acts" (of artists) while both working in a field (philosophy) and commenting on another field (art), both of which are based on the presumption that morality is an individuals construct, not an element on the periodic table.

A clergyman might refer to immoral acts within his professional doctrine, but a philosophy professor or artist has no such doctrines defining morality.
 
Last edited:

telemnemonics

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Posts
33,918
Age
62
Location
Maine
Regarding art critiquing morality, of course that can be many things, and one hopes the function opens the mind of the art patron to the possibility that they are unwillingly accepting doctrines without question, doctrines that they would not choose if facing challenging life choices.

As opposed to art simply attempting to replace the patrons doctrine with the artists doctrine.
 

TokyoPortrait

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Dec 10, 2017
Posts
4,214
Location
Tokyo, Japan
Hi.

When I first posted this article, my lizard brain, or at least, the lizard part of my brain, sent a wee warning or two. Uncharacteristically I actually paid attention. It was telling me, one, you’re going to have to respond to the people who only look at the photo or read the headline and perhaps the first few lines and think it's about Johnny Depp. And then added, two, you’re going to have to put your thinking cap on to respond to people who actually do read it, you silly, tired, worn out, deadline looming little boy.

To which the non-lizard part of my brain replied “Testudines?”

Pax/
Dean
 




Top