Judging Art by the Artist

[plastroncafe]

Do you judge a work by the artist who makes it?
Or accept a given work as something separate from the artist themselves?

For example, else thread people are saying they view the vocal work of Jason Biggs has been tainted because of things the actor has said on his personal Twitter Feed.

Is this something you've experienced?
If so when, and if not why do you think not?

[BubblyShell22]

If you're talking about artwork as in drawing or writing, then, no, I have not had this happen to me. Mainly because people like my stuff and that's that. Sure, I've had people criticize my work but not because of me personally, and that's fine. If people don't like my stuff, I'm fine with that.

As for judging people by artwork or writing and how they are as a person, I've never really had to do that because most of the artists and writers I look at are nice people who I have no problem with.

Yeah, I did say that about Jason, but what I meant by that was not that his voice acting was horrible, but more about how he acted outside of the company was the reason I didn't want him voicing the character, and I stand by it.

[plastroncafe]

In this instance "work" is any form of creative work.
Acting, Voice Acting, Writing, Screenwriting, Showrunning, Directing, Dance, what have you.

I'm not suggesting the work itself is of poor quality, I'm asking specifically if people, as consumers, view the work differently if it comes to pass that the creator of the work is less than savory for personal reasons.

[BubblyShell22]

Ah, I see. I didn't know if you also meant fan works such as fan fiction or fan art, so that's why I was referring to that as well. But to answer your question, it depends on the person and what they've done. I didn't really care for Jason's American Pie movies, but I was able to separate him from that when he voiced Leo because it was a different character and I thought he could pull it off. But when the Twitter stuff started coming out and kept on going, I just became so disgusted with how he acted, so I just couldn't separate his work from what he was doing.

It just depends on what the person has done. For instance, I have no problem with Seth Green because I'm a fan of Family Guy and have watched that show for a long time, so I'm able to separate him from that and from voicing Leo and to enjoy his work on both.

Lindsay Lohan is another actress I used to like, but after she kept messing up, I began to lose respect for her as a person and never really wanted to watch any other movies she starred in.

[Dirty Blond]

I don't conflate the two. I still like Woody Allen's films despite the Dylan Farrow situation.

[Ninjinister]

Being an a-hole doesn't change the work's quality, especially retroactively.

[Katie]

I can barely tell you different actors names...I typically only know them by a role. And i couldn't recite a director or producer's body of work to save my life.

Voice actors are nameless to me. Who cares who does a voice. It's the character I care about.

That level of caring about what goes into my entertainment baffles me. It's very nearly like saying a movie you've never seen is horrible just because of some actor in it...or who directed it.

same with books and authors

Or music

[CyberCubed]

90% of the time I don't even know who the artist/writers/directors of something are unless I purposely go searching for it.

[Powder]

I typically don't knock a person's efforts because I dislike them as a person or whatever. Talent is talent.

[Jester]

I guess it depends. Being a general jerk might not, but in the cases of Roman Polanski, Woody Allen, and lately (and more dishearteningly) Bill Cosby it becomes hard to separate them from the very serious alligations.

[Netkeeper]

It depends on what their art is and what the person in question supposedly did. I will never go near Moffat's work, I toss it in the trash if it has Seth MacFarlane's name attached to it, etc, because their influence on the work is undeniable and will inevitably piss me off.

For something where the person's reputation taints the work less, I may still be okay with it, while acknowledging the artists' flaws. I absolutely hate Vic Mignogna as a person, but I can't help but like his voice work since it's legitimately enjoyable on its own and the person's gross nature isn't reflected in it. Though it doesn't stop me from wishing the bastard would stop getting work.

That said, if I hear about the person's reputation before viewing the work, I'm not likely to go near it if I don't like what I hear.

Also, music artists are usually exempt from this, because I almost never know anything about what kind of person a musician is.

[Leo656]

I love Seth MacFarlane, ya grouch. :trazz:

I'unno, depends on the situation, for me. Like, I have a hard time enjoying any of John Lennon's lovey-peacey stuff, knowing full well that he smacked a bunch of women around and pretty much abandoned his kids. Also, that he knew he was a hypocrite and wasn't all that ashamed of it. Kinda bugs me, and it probably wouldn't if everyone didn't love the guy so much. Maybe it's not so much that HE did that stuff, but that lots of famous people have and are demonized, while Lennon gets a free pass because he did a few pretty songs. Like, people get mad if you talk about the stuff he did. Really mad. You Are Not Supposed To Acknowledge That John Lennon Was A Serial Woman-Puncher Under Any Circumstances... but he was. :ohwell: I think it's the hypocrisy of his supporters at large that bothers me more than the actual misdeed. Because I'm pretty forgiving in general, and actually have much less of a problem with people who did similar things and at least owned up to it, and it wasn't treated by the public like some kind of Thing Everyone Likes To Pretend Never Happened.

I'unno, strictly case-by-case for me, depending on the severity of the misdeed and the circumstances surrounding it. Face it, we're all hypocrites with this stuff ourselves. We'll hate an actor or musician we already dislike because he did Something Awful, but we will totally excuse the exact same misdeed if it's someone we're a huge fan of and we found out what they did way, way after the fact. Like, nobody hates Sean Connery for admitting he slapped his wife; after all, You Don't F'n Step To Ramirez and everyone knows it. But that's because everybody already loves Sean Connery and most chicks have wanted to bang him at one point, so it's easier to overlook than when some NFL player who already has a criminal reputation does it. There's a ton of Extenuating Circumstances when it comes to how we choose to Celebrate or Demonize our celebrities.

So, it's either case-by-case, and we're all hypocrites to some degree, OR, you stop enjoying pop culture entirely. No music, no TV, no movies... "Creative" and "Talented" people are, by definition, somewhat broken, some more than others, some to a criminal degree. So if you ever want to enjoy listening to "Stairway To Heaven", you simply have to get over the fact that the guy doing the wicked guitar solo had his goons kidnap a 14-year-old girl, then kept her under lock-and-key for a year while he gave her tons of drugs and banged her a few thousand times. And he was never punished for it. Ever.

To some degree, you have to separate artist from art in order to ever enjoy anything. At the same time though, Wow, artists and actors and musicians are a bunch of f***ing scumbags, by and large.

[pennydreadful]

One could argue that humans in general can be a pretty awful crew. I do agree that someone being heinous doesn't change the quality of their work - and if you choose not to enjoy a book, movie or band because someone's horrible, your entertainment options are going to be severely reduced (see aforementioned point: humans in general can be pretty awful).

Myself, I compromise - there are certain things which are "make or break" for me and if someone crosses that line (for example, being a homophobe), then I exercise the right to not spend my money or time on their book/movie/music.

But yeah, there's not really a perfect solution, unfortunately. Sometimes you have to make concessions and prioritize, for the sake of your own sanity, if nothing else - or you'll go mad.

[ProactiveMan]

Sometimes I think we should be less judgemental. We don't always know as much about people as we think we do, especially nowadays that our information comes from stupid tweets and self interested media hacks. Like pennydreadful said, people are floored in general. Even the most upright of us are dirty in some way.

I'd love to say I follow that advice myself, but I don't. I can't always separate artist from creation.

[pandaderek]

Well, it depends on what aspect of the art that people appreciate. Most people, they appreciate the mediums of art. Like, people appreciate drawings of Batman. But, that drawing is just a medium to convey what the artists want the audience to understand. For instance, Christopher Nolan used Batman as a medium to convey the complexities of justice, like, how they built a justice system on the lie of Harvey Dent being "untouchable," in the Dark Knight.

So, I don’t think you should judge an artist, based on the medium, but, rather, judge their art on their personal expressions. Like, Justin Bieber can sing great (medium), but, he needs writers because his personal expressions, based on his personality, sucks…because he’s a ****-bag.

[DarkFell]

I try not to overjudge too much. Sure, I've come across a few well-known people and celebs that could have come off as a little more friendlier *and who hasn't?* but I liked the work that they did and that helps out in allowing me to enjoy the media.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

I can only think of a few times I've done this. The one that immediately comes to mind is Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card. I was never a big fan of his work to begin with (Frankly, I thought the entire premise of the book was laughable) but then I learned of his political views regarding women and gays, and now find him to be a complete douche. I didn't even go see the movie and would not support his work with a single penny, as A)I didn't even like the book the movie was based on, and B) his beliefs combined with the fact that he tries to put said views into his works makes me think of him as a petty, little man, and I can't justify enjoying his books (I never did like them much anyway) while knowing what the creator is like.

In contrast, I LOVE Piers Anthony, a writer who works in the same genre(s) as Card, but is, IMHO a FAR better human being. I have always enjoyed his books, but he also has helped fans in ways I doubt Card ever would. He wrote letters FOR YEARS to a fan who was first in a coma, then paralyzed, then slowly recovering mobility and function. And even went to visit her several times- at his own expense. This was a teenaged girl who was nearly killed by a drunk driver. And he has done similar things for other fans, most notably a woman who was contemplating suicide, but was "saved" by his correspondence. He even made her a character in one of his books.

Sometimes it's hard to separate a work from the person who created it, because once you know something about the personality and views of the person, it often changes the meaning of the work, because you know WHERE it came from. (ie what kind of mind created it.) When the person is a horrible a** in real life, sometimes it shows in their work, and even when it doesn't, you still have to consider that the kind of person who created it does have an influence on the work itself.

[pennydreadful]

Orson Scott Carde was actually the exact person I was thinking of when I made my post. :lol:

[Davetello]

Nah, I don't let my feelings towards someone affect my judgement of what they do. The footballer Cristiano Ronaldo seems like a pr1ck (going by his public persona, which can be very misleading given the cult of celebrity, but it's all we have to go on). I could give you examples of things he's done which are pathetic and imply a severe lack of humility and self-awareness. However, it doesn't stop me from admitting that the man is an excellent footballer (even if I'd rather he wasn't, as he's an embarrassment to the game). I like some of Brian Michael Bendis's work, but he's said some terrible things. I don't let it stop me enjoying Daredevil or Ultimate Spider-Man, though.

This is a good thread though. At first I thought it was simply asking if we would judge a piece of art based on who produced it. I thought it was gonna simply be about artwork, which is something I enjoy looking at but don't think about extensively. So the thread originally held little interest for me. But I opened it anyway, and when I seen that it was referring to 'art' in a more general manner, and seems to be asking if we're likely to underrate someone's work if we don't like the person or their previous work, the topic became more fascinating to me.

Perhaps we should be more moral. Perhaps we should take a stand and if someone is talented but has done unethical things we should boycott their work. I too don't conflate the two, but if someone is a bad person, or a misogynist, or a racist...are we guilty by association for enjoying their work? On the other hand, there are so many flawed people in the entertainment business, and sometime it's impossible to know what people are really like anyway, so trying to be ethical about the art we consume seems like an impossible mission.

[plastroncafe]

So, it's either case-by-case, and we're all hypocrites to some degree, OR, you stop enjoying pop culture entirely. No music, no TV, no movies... "Creative" and "Talented" people are, by definition, somewhat broken, some more than others, some to a criminal degree. So if you ever want to enjoy listening to "Stairway To Heaven", you simply have to get over the fact that the guy doing the wicked guitar solo had his goons kidnap a 14-year-old girl, then kept her under lock-and-key for a year while he gave her tons of drugs and banged her a few thousand times. And he was never punished for it. Ever.

To some degree, you have to separate artist from art in order to ever enjoy anything. At the same time though, Wow, artists and actors and musicians are a bunch of f***ing scumbags, by and large.

I feel as though just chalking DickRinse behavior to creative types not only gives people who exhibit DickRinse a pass, but it also serves to glorify that kind of thing. Like: I'm a jerk because I'm an artiste! And not I'm a jerk because of the things that I do which are jerkish.

I try to avoid the work of people who do DickRinse things because I'd rather they not get my money.

It's been alleged that Michael Fassbender beat a lover of his (http://www.thefrisky.com/2012-04-03/about-those-michael-fassbenderdomestic-assault-rumors/), and as such I try to stay away from financially supporting his work when I'm able to.

(Having said that, watching Gina Carrano beat the snot out of him in "Haywire" made the entire movie for me.)

"Firefly" and "Chuck" have been soured for me because of the online antics of Adam Baldwin. Both he and the titular Chuck, Zachary Levi, couldn't possibly be more different politically, but only Baldwin's been a DickRinse about it.

I normally steer clear of Tom Cruise movies as well, but have no problem admitting when I'm wrong. "Edge of Tomorrow" is a fantastic movie that I highly recommend.

There's a saying on tumblr: Your Fave is Problematic.
That no person is perfect, and that if we just ruled out everything that anyone has ever done wrong as a reason to avoid what they do we'd never see/read/listen/experience anything.

It's important to know and acknowledge that the people whose work we enjoy are fallible, and that it's our job as consumers of media and art to call those people to the mat when they deserve it.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Orson Scott Carde was actually the exact person I was thinking of when I made my post. :lol:

LOL, we think alike! Just got into a heated debate w/ my other half about him, too. Somehow he equates my dislike of Card's books based on the politics and unbelievable premise (What sane parents would allow their government to forcibly remove kids from their family to be placed in the military at incredibly young ages to be trained as a weapon? Most parents would've revolted long ago, IMHO....) of the series with the "immorality" of T-cest stories about consensual relationships between close "siblings" who may not even be biologically related (So, if Cyndi and Bobby Brady fell in love and wanted to marry, is that wrong?). I don't share his opinions on the subjects.

The allegations against Cosby are another thing, however. To me, this just seems like another money-chaser looking to get publicity and money, rather than an actual offense having been committed. Why is this JUST coming out NOW??!! I'm aware that this woman said something about it several years ago, but now suddenly we're hearing about it again? Just sounds off, to me.

[plastroncafe]

And just today news broke that the artist and co-creator of one of my favorite new comics, "The Rat Queens," was arrested for domestic abuse.

http://www.themarysue.com/rat-queens-artist-domestic-abuse/

Damnation.
My faves really ARE problematic.

[BubblyShell22]

Yeah, it sucks when people we like go off the deep end, but if we keep excusing their behavior, it'll just get worse. I'm all for it if people who do bad things change and reform as they admit what they've done is wrong. That's fine, but if people do things and don't admit to it or learn from it, then they don't get a pass from me at all.

[slashpieturtlemix]

I grew up in the art world and I think of everything as a separate piece no matter who that person is. Plus its the only way I can live with liking Rob Liefeld lol

[Bloodsucker]

What did Jason Biggs do?

I did not read it.

[plastroncafe]

He made sexist jokes regarding the wives of high ranking politicians, and has a history of off-color humor with a dude-bro bent.

The problems escalated somewhat when the official TMNT Nick twitter thought it might be a good idea to link to the Social Media sites of its voice actors, and Biggs' Twitter feed is not for children.

I'd go so far as to say it's not for a good number of adults either.

But there's never been a confirmation that what he's said over Twitter is what got him "fired" or that he'd been fired at all. He was just...replaced.

[BubblyShell22]

I think Nick issued a statement saying that Biggs left because he had other commitments, but that could also be a cover up to why he was really fired. Either way, I'm not sad he's gone, and to be honest, when I first heard he was going to be voicing Leo, I wasn't too happy until I heard the voice. Then I figured it would be a good idea to give him a chance, so I did. Then I heard about the Twitter stuff, and I lost respect for him, mainly for the comments about the Malaysian Airlines tragedy that occurred. So, there you go.

[plastroncafe]

Source for that, because it's the first I'm hearing of it, and some actual confirmation would be nice.

[BubblyShell22]

Don't have one. I thought it was somewhere in one of the Official Info threads or something. Can't remember, and I really don't feel like looking for it either.

[plastroncafe]

Maybe if we're both lucky someone will come up with a link and we can finally put this debate to rest.

[Powder]

They never issued a statement, nor was there ever a peep by any of the other staff/voice actors. It remains in speculation. Prolly got some NDA's in place, which would be a credit towards his firing being over that controversy, rather than other work taking priority.

[Bloodsucker]

I still don't know what he said.

Anybody have specifics? It would be nice if you would share them thanks :)

[plastroncafe]

http://forums.thetechnodrome.com/showthread.php?t=39429&highlight=jason+biggs

http://forums.thetechnodrome.com/showthread.php?t=41673&highlight=jason+biggs

:D?

Content Warning: Michelle Malkin

[BubblyShell22]

They never issued a statement, nor was there ever a peep by any of the other staff/voice actors. It remains in speculation. Prolly got some NDA's in place, which would be a credit towards his firing being over that controversy, rather than other work taking priority.

I could have sworn someone posted something on here about a statement regarding his departure. Maybe I'm wrong and they read an article on it or something. Not sure now, but I could have sworn there was something that was posted here about that.

[plastroncafe]

If you ever feel up for going in search of it, please let us know when you do.

[BubblyShell22]

Well, all I can remember is that it was either in the Season 2 Official Info Thread, the VA Thread, or the thread on Jason Biggs. That's all I can recall at the moment.

[Bloodsucker]

http://forums.thetechnodrome.com/showthread.php?t=39429&highlight=jason+biggs

http://forums.thetechnodrome.com/showthread.php?t=41673&highlight=jason+biggs

:D?

Content Warning: Michelle Malkin

Oh. But did he say it as Leonardo, in his Leonardo voice?
I don't understand. Is he being paid to tweet from his personal account?

He shouldn't offend the Christians. They know how people should be treated. They have this saying "Judge not, lest ye be judged yourself." I think that means everyone should be held to the same standards, or something.
There is no way anyone would want their personal accounts to be used against them, or their livelihood. That would be unfair, wouldn't it? The Christians must be on his side.

You are right though, that if you take on the responsibility of being an actor, you need to be better than everyone else. You can't say what you want, because then people might think that you are not the character.

Byan Cranston should make Meth in real life, and kill people. If he didn't I would get confused.

I hope Seth Green understands that now that he is Leonardo, he has to become a real ninja.

[Netkeeper]

He shouldn't offend the Christians. They know how people should be treated. They have this saying "Judge not, lest ye be judged yourself." I think that means everyone should be held to the same standards, or something.
There is no way anyone would want their personal accounts to be used against them, or their livelihood. That would be unfair, wouldn't it? The Christians must be on his side.
What does this **** have to do with anything.

[Bloodsucker]

What does this **** have to do with anything.

Hi There. I nice to meet you. What does what mean?

[Netkeeper]

...

You didn't read a word I said, did you?

[Bloodsucker]

...

You didn't read a word I said, did you?

I read what you wrote to me, but I don't know the response you gave me didn't make sense.

[PangolinFeets]

And just today news broke that the artist and co-creator of one of my favorite new comics, "The Rat Queens," was arrested for domestic abuse.

http://www.themarysue.com/rat-queens-artist-domestic-abuse/

Damnation.
My faves really ARE problematic.

This was really devastating for me. I actually hung out with Roc and shared drinks with him on a few occasions. I felt sick after this news broke. I knew I couldn't support RQ after reading his ex-wife's blog. It was really upsetting.

However, Wiebe announced earlier today that Upchurch is no long illustrating RQ.

[Dirty Blond]

If this is true, then I can no longer support Bill Cosby:

http://i.imgur.com/socD86K.jpg

[Jephael]

I remember when I first watched the Naked Gun films long after the O.J. Simpson trial, it felt a little weird watching him and getting attached to the character he portrayed, but at the same time the silliness of the movie itself had me so disconnected from reality to the point I kinda forgot about it because I was enjoying the story.

[Netkeeper]

I read what you wrote to me, but I don't know the response you gave me didn't make sense.
Uh, no hun, you're the one that's not making any sense.

[Powder]

Uh, no hun, you're the one that's not making any sense.

http://i60.tinypic.com/2nb9bb6.jpg

[DarkFell]

If this is true, then I can no longer support Bill Cosby:

http://i.imgur.com/socD86K.jpg
That news fail image is so epic it's almost a win.

[turtlefanforever]

if it's quality work you can't take that away from them. Doesn't mean I have to like the person that did such work.

[Bloodsucker]

Uh, no hun, you're the one that's not making any sense.

I don't think so, but maybe you misunderstand many things? There are too many alarmist rants here. Deconstruct what was said and why in his twitter.

I still think maybe you all have him wrong. As a woman, I get his wife and it seems like if he was the guy you think he is she would have left him.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/17/jenny-mollen-i-like-you-just-the-way-i-am_n_5488933.html

If you watch Orange is the new Black, or any movie of him, it is clear he makes fun of men every chance he gets.

I think he is a Liberal who does not like the conservative party, because they are often oppressive.

I think most of you only read the headlines and assumed.

[Netkeeper]

http://i60.tinypic.com/2nb9bb6.jpg
I was hoping somebody would make that joke. :lol:

I don't think so, but maybe you misunderstand many things? There are too many alarmist rants here. Deconstruct what was said and why in his twitter.

I still think maybe you all have him wrong. As a woman, I get his wife and it seems like if he was the guy you think he is she would have left him.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/17/jenny-mollen-i-like-you-just-the-way-i-am_n_5488933.html

If you watch Orange is the new Black, or any movie of him, it is clear he makes fun of men every chance he gets.

I think he is a Liberal who does not like the conservative party, because they are often oppressive.

I think most of you only read the headlines and assumed.
Okay, now I'm convinced you had no idea what I said. :|

[slashpieturtlemix]

No idea what this is about any more...........

[pennydreadful]

He shouldn't offend the Christians. They know how people should be treated. They have this saying "Judge not, lest ye be judged yourself." I think that means everyone should be held to the same standards, or something.
There is no way anyone would want their personal accounts to be used against them, or their livelihood. That would be unfair, wouldn't it? The Christians must be on his side.

http://i.qkme.me/3twcrm.jpg

Just a heads-up, it's against house rules to bring up religion. It always ends up in a fight and the mods end up having to get called in for clean-up.

You're new so you probably weren't to know, but yeah - it's kind of one of those "out of bounds" topics. :)

[Netkeeper]

Also, it has nothing to do with anything. It's just there to piss people off.

[Leo656]

In the case of Biggs, I will say AGAIN as I have said many times that if you are a public figure you CAN be taken to task, reprimanded, or even fired for things you say on your Twitter, FB, etc., because companies are accountable to their shareholders and their customers. I'm similarly hamstrung due to my wrestling commitments; I am not FORCED to say or not-say anything BUT it's entirely understood that any and all wrestling promotions can fire me OR not book me if they don't like anything I (or even my wife) say online. Because you are Representing Your Company even on your own time. MOST jobs now have something like this in place, as we've all read many times in recent years about people getting fired from their "normal" jobs because of their FB posts. I could theoretically get fired from my gym job over something like that, we have an "at-will" agreement meaning it could be theoretically terminated for any or no reason, say for example, if I said I didn't like it there or even talked too enthusiastically on FB about a different gym. Seems trivial, but technically, they'd be within their rights to let me go. That's life. Play By The Rules.

Did Biggs actually get fired from Nick because of the things he said? It probably had a little more to it than that but I promise that it did NOT help. And if he was fired, Nick were 100% within their rights to do so. I would not be at all surprised if, prior to being hired for the role, Biggs had to sign some kind of "Morality Clause" stating he could be let go for certain behaviors that don't correlate to working on a Kids' show, because again, that's a standard thing anymore.

So, yeah, Not Being A Douche has become a job requirement. It may seem unfair to some, but there's nothing unethical about it and it happens every day. It's not unfair, people could just choose NOT to be douches.

[Jephael]

Not Being A Douche has become a job requirement. It may seem unfair to some, but there's nothing unethical about it and it happens every day. It's not unfair, people could just choose NOT to be douches.

I'd love to see that on a billboard somewhere!!! :tlol:

[slashpieturtlemix]

In the case of Biggs, I will say AGAIN as I have said many times that if you are a public figure you CAN be taken to task, reprimanded, or even fired for things you say on your Twitter, FB, etc., because companies are accountable to their shareholders and their customers. I'm similarly hamstrung due to my wrestling commitments; I am not FORCED to say or not-say anything BUT it's entirely understood that any and all wrestling promotions can fire me OR not book me if they don't like anything I (or even my wife) say online. Because you are Representing Your Company even on your own time. MOST jobs now have something like this in place, as we've all read many times in recent years about people getting fired from their "normal" jobs because of their FB posts. I could theoretically get fired from my gym job over something like that, we have an "at-will" agreement meaning it could be theoretically terminated for any or no reason, say for example, if I said I didn't like it there or even talked too enthusiastically on FB about a different gym. Seems trivial, but technically, they'd be within their rights to let me go. That's life. Play By The Rules.

Did Biggs actually get fired from Nick because of the things he said? It probably had a little more to it than that but I promise that it did NOT help. And if he was fired, Nick were 100% within their rights to do so. I would not be at all surprised if, prior to being hired for the role, Biggs had to sign some kind of "Morality Clause" stating he could be let go for certain behaviors that don't correlate to working on a Kids' show, because again, that's a standard thing anymore.

So, yeah, Not Being A Douche has become a job requirement. It may seem unfair to some, but there's nothing unethical about it and it happens every day. It's not unfair, people could just choose NOT to be douches.

I got a quote from a book that reminds me of this:

"Ah, my poor boy! You can't fight fate- did I neglect to teach you that? People cannot choose where, when, and into what conditions they are born. From the moment of birth, each person... must live on life's terms. The world is cruel. But that's only natural." -Desty Nova (Battle Angel Alita)

[BubblyShell22]

In the case of Biggs, I will say AGAIN as I have said many times that if you are a public figure you CAN be taken to task, reprimanded, or even fired for things you say on your Twitter, FB, etc., because companies are accountable to their shareholders and their customers. I'm similarly hamstrung due to my wrestling commitments; I am not FORCED to say or not-say anything BUT it's entirely understood that any and all wrestling promotions can fire me OR not book me if they don't like anything I (or even my wife) say online. Because you are Representing Your Company even on your own time. MOST jobs now have something like this in place, as we've all read many times in recent years about people getting fired from their "normal" jobs because of their FB posts. I could theoretically get fired from my gym job over something like that, we have an "at-will" agreement meaning it could be theoretically terminated for any or no reason, say for example, if I said I didn't like it there or even talked too enthusiastically on FB about a different gym. Seems trivial, but technically, they'd be within their rights to let me go. That's life. Play By The Rules.

Did Biggs actually get fired from Nick because of the things he said? It probably had a little more to it than that but I promise that it did NOT help. And if he was fired, Nick were 100% within their rights to do so. I would not be at all surprised if, prior to being hired for the role, Biggs had to sign some kind of "Morality Clause" stating he could be let go for certain behaviors that don't correlate to working on a Kids' show, because again, that's a standard thing anymore.

So, yeah, Not Being A Douche has become a job requirement. It may seem unfair to some, but there's nothing unethical about it and it happens every day. It's not unfair, people could just choose NOT to be douches.

Well, said, Leo. I couldn't have said it better myself. I get so sick of people acting like they can say and do whatever they want when that's really not the case. Freedom of Speech only protects you from government persecution meaning that you can say what you want without the government penalizing you. But anyone else is fair game for that depending on your comments or actions. That's just the way life is, and if you think that you can say and do whatever you want just because you have the supposed freedom to do so, you better take a change of heart with that one or you may find yourself on the unemployment line. That's one of the reasons my mom never posted anything on Facebook because she knew she could get in trouble if she did that due to her job. She probably could do it now, but she chooses not to because she's not that type of person.

Just remember: No one gets to do whatever they want. There are rules everywhere whether you like it or not.

[shuriken]

Jeeez
I have to separate Art from the Artist unless of course the Art is an open stament about something I guess?
Like certain musicians giving their accounts of life events and experiences then knowing the context of the song is extremely helpful and sometimes gives a certain song more meaning or weight, thus making the artist more relatable and I enjoy it more. Like the Clash.
In Bigg's case and in many other actor's cases I have to separate the art from the artist. In a lot of bands and books and stuff I have to because the more I know about someone the more likely there is going to be a fundamental difference in terms of beliefs. And like some of you have said some things are simply deal breakers.
Sean Penn might be one of my fave actors but the man tied up and beat Madonna for what some people say were hours.
Take Floyd Mayweather for example. He comes off as an arrogant a-hole that disrespects his father, his opponents, contemporaries and has beaten up on a women before. As a person I feel he's not that great, kind of a terrible person to be honest. As a boxer however he's one of the best. He's a damn adaptability machine. He takes his opponent's weakness and exploits them more than Kris Jenner exploits her children. Point I'm trying to make is I have to overlook some terrible things that people do or else I won't be able to enjoy anything. Hell I've done some things that aren't great but it's a part of being human. Never beat on a woman or anything like that but still.

[FoxBoxKid]

Well, said, Leo. I couldn't have said it better myself. I get so sick of people acting like they can say and do whatever they want when that's really not the case. Freedom of Speech only protects you from government persecution meaning that you can say what you want without the government penalizing you. But anyone else is fair game for that depending on your comments or actions. That's just the way life is, and if you think that you can say and do whatever you want just because you have the supposed freedom to do so, you better take a change of heart with that one or you may find yourself on the unemployment line. That's one of the reasons my mom never posted anything on Facebook because she knew she could get in trouble if she did that due to her job. She probably could do it now, but she chooses not to because she's not that type of person.

Just remember: No one gets to do whatever they want. There are rules everywhere whether you like it or not.

You think people shouldn't be able to say whatever they want? If someone says something you don't like, you can just walk away or ignore them. No one's forcing anyone to listen. And you shouldn't be fired for something you do off the job. That's just ridiculous.

[pennydreadful]

There are limits though, Fox - that's what people are saying. You can't walk into an airport and start talking about bombs without there being a reaction to that, and consequences.

You wouldn't walk up to a Chinese person, call him a "chink" and then expect for him not to be offended.

You wouldn't walk into a maternity ward and start cracking jokes about dead babies without expecting to get the stink-eye.

I'm a fan of dark humor and people have the right to say what they like (however odious), but you can't expect people to not react, or for there not to be consequences. That's part of living in a society - you are required to consider other peoples' feelings. When you don't display empathy, then yeah, peoples' opinions of you are going to be altered.

It's basic 'cause and effect'. People don't exist in a vacuum. You may have the constitutional right to say whatever you like, but that doesn't mean that there aren't still consequences. You can't expect the rest of the world to change to accommodate antisocial behavior. It doesn't work that way.

If someone sounds off about hating black people, he has that freedom of speech - however, he cannot then complain when people are offended. He cannot complain if people choose not to endorse or support him.

Simply put, if you act like a rude d*ckhead, don't expect the rest of the world to stand around glad-handing you - because it's not going to happen. The world isn't a Seth McFarlane tv series. Part of being a grown-up is realizing that you cannot, in fact, do whatever you like without there being some repercussions.

Now let's all stop talking about Biggs - it's starting to turn into dead horse territory. :roll:

[FoxBoxKid]

There are limits though, Fox - that's what people are saying. You can't walk into an airport and start talking about bombs without there being a reaction to that, and consequences.

You wouldn't walk up to a Chinese person, call him a "chink" and then expect for him not to be offended.

You wouldn't walk into a maternity ward and start cracking jokes about dead babies without expecting to get the stink-eye.

I'm a fan of dark humor and people have the right to say what they like (however odious), but you can't expect people to not react, or for there not to be consequences. That's part of living in a society - you are required to consider other peoples' feelings. When you don't display empathy, then yeah, peoples' opinions of you are going to be altered.

It's basic 'cause and effect'. People don't exist in a vacuum. You may have the constitutional right to say whatever you like, but that doesn't mean that there aren't still consequences. You can't expect the rest of the world to change to accommodate antisocial behavior. It doesn't work that way.

If someone sounds off about hating black people, he has that freedom of speech - however, he cannot then complain when people are offended. He cannot complain if people choose not to endorse or support him.

Simply put, if you act like a rude d*ckhead, don't expect the rest of the world to stand around glad-handing you - because it's not going to happen. The world isn't a Seth McFarlane tv series. Part of being a grown-up is realizing that you cannot, in fact, do whatever you like without there being some repercussions.

Now let's all stop talking about Biggs - it's starting to turn into dead horse territory. :roll:

I completely agree.

[Leo656]

You wouldn't walk into a maternity ward and start cracking jokes about dead babies...


Oh yes I goddamn would...

...without expecting to get the stink-eye.


..Oh, well yeah, duh. :lol:

Speaking offfff.... anybody got any good ones?! :tgrin: I KNOW I DO!!!

[pennydreadful]

http://31.media.tumblr.com/ca2bd3701b88f7e78b20cc88bb42fb6d/tumblr_met9boQPYy1qb9oa5o1_500.gif

[shuriken]

^^^Dude was a straight up psycho in the good son. Jeez:lol:

[Jephael]

http://31.media.tumblr.com/ca2bd3701b88f7e78b20cc88bb42fb6d/tumblr_met9boQPYy1qb9oa5o1_500.gif

^^^Dude was a straight up psycho in the good son. Jeez:lol:

He wasn't exactly a saint in Home Alone either.

[plastroncafe]

Now he's in a touring band that performs songs about pizza.

But I digress.

I brought up the topic not to beat the dead horse that is Biggs, or to go around once again with regards to why he's no longer on the TMNT Toon, but because this is something I think a lot about.

Example:
My love of Firefly was tarnished by Adam Baldwin's behavior online. I try to avoid movies with Michael Fassbender in them because it's been alleged that he dragged an ex of his with his car, and I'd rather not financially support someone who does that.

(Save for the movie "Haywire" where Gina Carano beats the snot out of his character, that was nice and cathartic.)

[shuriken]

He wasn't exactly a saint in Home Alone either.

^ Granted he was a bit of a sadist, but at least he never killed a baby. But Yeah go Pizza Underground.

[BubblyShell22]

Yeah, he was a bit of a jerk in Home Alone, but I think the gist of it is that we're supposed to feel sympathy for him in being treated the way he is. But I certainly don't feel sympathy for him now that I'm older, though I did when I was younger and saw the movie.

[Shark_Blade]

I think i pretty much separate the artist's work from his personal life.

Biggs might be an asshole but I still prefer his voice as Leo in Nick toon (Seth's still a bit awkward but I think I'll get used to him soon).

The Home Alone kid, I think he's pretty average boy naughty, I don't see him anywhere near being a jerk at all in the two movies? :-? I would've acted like him given the situation, maybe a bit more extreme just to show the bad guys who's boss. :evilgrin:

[BubblyShell22]

Well, I'm not talking about when he fought the burglars as that was genius. I'm talking about how he acted at the beginning of the first movie.

[shuriken]

Well he was just being an 8 year old kid. What kid doesn't go around saying stupid childish things as an 8 year old?

[BubblyShell22]

Yes, exactly, but as I've gotten older and seen the movie, I still find it hard to sympathize with him when he talks to his mom the way he did.

[shuriken]

^^ I get you. I just disagree. And correct me if I'm wrong but you don't interact with a lot of kids do you?
I've had my nieces and nephews say they hate me one second, but in a few minutes they'll be ya know jumping on me and hugging me. Just cuz they forget whaever the hell they were angry about. Kids can be bi-polar little jerks.:lol:
That's how they learn. Which is why I think that scene worked. I can remember a few times I said stupid things to my parents because well I could be a little jerk sometimes. I woulda hated Home Alone if the kid was an angel cuz that woulda been unrelatable.

[Papenbrook]

Usually, it's extremely difficult for me to separate the art from the artist, especially if said artist committed a terribly deplorable action/crime.

I usually have to judge the artist before I can view the work.

[Cure]

Oh, good. An old thread full of people I had almost forgotten that I wish I had. Thanks for the necropost, I guess.