How should we decide between the art and the artist?

You are engrossed in reading a beloved novel when a staggering headline about its author appears on your phone. Or perhaps your favourite song comes on shuffle, only to remind you of the controversy surrounding the musician who created it. Gradually, an action that once felt effortless becomes somewhat dissonant.  

In an age where artists’ personal identities are increasingly publicised, this conflict between personal enjoyment and ethical discomfort affects nearly all of us as consumers of media. From J.K. Rowling’s controversial views on transgender issues, Kanye West’s antisemitic remarks, to confirmed charges against R. Kelly, discussions arise about whether it is desirable to separate our support for the art from its creator.  

These debates often fall into a false binary; we either divorce the art from the artist entirely or outright reject both.  

The first option risks overlooking the ways our consumption continues to multidimensionally benefit an artist through financial support and cultural visibility. Yet, the second may neglect the independent significance that art can acquire in the lives of its audience. As French literary critic Roland Barthes proposed in The Death of the Author, the meaning of a work is partly determined by personal engagement and not solely by its creator. Books, songs and films often become attached to one’s intimate memories, making total rejection a loss of something emotionally significant.  

The difficulty lies in that neither complete separation nor rejection leaves enough room for nuance. Maybe instead we should focus on what ethical responsibilities we have as consumers when engaging with the works of controversial artists.

Rather than seeking a single answer, we need a framework that helps us distinguish between and evaluate different forms of support. Such a framework can be found in consequentialist and deontological ethics.  

Why consequences matter

Consequentialism is the ethical perspective that actions should be judged primarily by their outcomes. Applied to the art and artist dilemma, this viewpoint redirects the attention away from abstract questions and towards the practical effects of our consumption. What impact does one’s engagement have on the artist’s wealth, influence and public platform? 

Financial support is the most visible dimension as money flows directly from people’s purchases to the creator or their associated industries. Yet, symbolic support is just as significant. Attention and traction itself are a form of currency in algorithmic contemporary media. Repeated streaming of a song or the sharing of a post increases its cultural relevance and signals to platforms that the subject generates interest.  

Consider the case of J.K. Rowling.  

The Harry Potter franchise creates significant ongoing commercial and cultural value through many products and experiences. At the same time, Rowling’s public comments on transgender issues and financial backing of these views have sparked widespread criticism. This led many readers to question whether further engagement with the franchise will allow her rhetoric to reach a larger audience. When those views contribute to a climate of exclusion and hostility towards transgender people and actual changes in law, supporting Rowling’s influence as a consumer may carry societal consequences beyond individual acts of consumption.  

A comparable dynamic can be illustrated in the music industry. Following Kanye West’s reported antisemitic remarks on social media, on the news and in his music in 2022, major companies including Adidas severed ties with him and quoted his comments as “unacceptable, hateful and dangerous”. However, institutional responses alone do not undermine an artist’s influence long-term. In April 2026, two sold-out Kanye performances in Los Angeles reportedly grossed more than USD$33 million. Here, individual consumption driving demand for his concert becomes ethically impactful, since it generates large-scale cultural relevance, further financial gain and trivialises the harmful impact of his influence. 

Choosing with awareness

This outcome-driven viewpoint illuminates an important distinction – not all forms of engagement carry the same consequences. We can consider our choices along a spectrum of ethical responsibility.  

At one end of the spectrum are forms of engagement that provide little or no new support to the creator. On a personal scale, revisiting Harry Potter as a childhood favourite already sitting on your bookshelf allows appreciation of the work without contributing to Rowling’s current brand. At the other end are forms of consumption that reinforce an artist’s influence more directly. Attending expensive paid events or heavily promoting Kanye content online help sustain the foundational systems that keep the artist influential.  

The more active the support, the stronger ethical justification it requires.

Limits of artistic appreciation

Nevertheless, if one’s engagement gives the artist no meaningful profit or influence – for example, if they are decreased and their estate does not continue their wrongdoing – does it automatically make consumption ethically permissible? Irrespective of consequences, deontological ethics judge the right or wrong of an action based on principles, rights and duties.  

Famous American singer R. Kelly was convicted of offences involving sexual exploitation and forced labour in 2021. Prosecutors proved that he used his fame to recruit and exploit victims. The documentary Surviving R. Kelly allows female victims to recount their experiences. Their testimonies provide evidence of the wrongs committed against these women, which gives audiences reason to consider a change in behaviour, such as boycotting his music, regardless of the artistic appreciation or personal enjoyment his art may provide.  

From a deontological perspective, audiences have a duty to support victims and to withdraw support from perpetrators, rather than allowing artistic talent to excuse conduct that violates fundamental rights.   

As active participants in contemporary culture, the relationship between art and the artist will always remain complicated. By recognising that every stream contributes to a dynamic of attention and social power, we must realise that our daily choices are not trivial. Ethical consumption begins when we start consciously asking what our engagement with a work means for the world around us and what it reflects about ourselves.