John Mayer, his music may be decent, whatever, he sucks, therefore his music sucks - Kearns, I agree with you 100%.

If I'm giving them money, I can take their evilness into account.

It's sort of like saying that if you like a product, you shouldn't be allowed to choose a competitors product just because they pollute less or treat their workers better.

Actually, John Mayer doesn't suck. His music may not be the type that you like (after listening to both his albums, I would say that his first was better) but if you listen to any of the covers he's done, you'll quickly realize that the boy can play.

Now...on the topic of appreciating art vs the artist: I agree with the un-named coworker (let's call him Gruska for arguments sake) in that in terms of enjoyment of art, you can definitely enjoy something that is crafted by an artist that does not uphold the same values as the recipient of that art. For instance, I like Japanese paintings and instrumental music, but I don't agree with their beliefs on the value of women. But that's probably not in the same vein of art which sparked this blog post.

Another example then...System of a Down. They are definitely a group that says things which I don't agree with. They definitely sing lyrics on topics of which I offer no support. But those guys sure do play some interesting music. I appreciate their talent and the skill they have for weaving different themes and feeling into each one of their songs.

So in short, yes, I agree with "Gruska" in that you can separate the art from the artist. Art is personal to each person. I'm sure there are some extreme examples of artists that I would find repugnant enough to totally turn me off from even sampling their art, but if you pulled the Folders url[http://www.folgers.com/index.shtml] taste test (the art version) I would judge the value of their art without the bias that comes from knowing their beliefs, now wouldn't I?

The [url=http://www.folgers.com/]Folgers[/url] taste test isn't going to sell many CDs, however.

I think I have to agree with the first guy, let's call him "Kearns" has a very good point. If you look at extreme examples like Wagner and Marilyn Manson I'm sure you can see that it's easy to judge their work seasoned with who they are.

If our hypothetical "Kearns" had made that comment, then I might still have a hypothetical "Gruska" on my side when I were to say that one can enjoy the music without the lyrics. If you consider the voice to be just another instrument and don't let the actual meaning of the words sink in (maybe that's only something I do) then you can still appreciate the musical nature of a piece.

For instance, most (if not all) of the music sung by Pavoratti sounds great and I can appreciate it. I don't speak the majority of the languages he sings in, so I have no problem with not paying attention to the meaning of the lyrics. Marilyn Manson's "The Beautiful People" is a great, catchy song (to me) if you don't speak English or phaze out the words. He has some other interesting stuff too, of which I have no appreciation of for the lyrical content, but I do for the musical content. I don't actually own any Marilyn Manson albums, because I probably don't want to give him any money, but I can respect his artistic creativity - when I don't focus on the lyrical content.

Some people may find that to be weak argument, but I - as a guitarist - tend to focus more on the way a musical piece is put together than I do the lyrics. I'm willing to bet that the "Gruska's" of the world will agree with me to some extent.

All I was saying is that John Mayer sucks as a person, therefore his music sucks. I think that is what we are going for here.

I guess I should weigh in here, since I started the discussion. I agree with Nate that John Mayer is an incredible musician (though he should branch out more on his albums), I don't know much about System of a Down, but I feel the same way about Eminem. The guy's got some real issues, and I probably wouldn't invite him over for dinner, but his music is catchy, and he can rap like a madman. Like Nate, I don't focus on the lyrics too much (I listen to Adiemus, who's idea of lyrics is to make noises with their mouths that fit with the music) - the only time they bother me is if they sound stupid, which is definitely another reason why Eminem's music doesn't bother me.

The incredible egos of David Lee Roth and Eddie Van Halen clashed well to make some of the music exciting music you'll ever hear, but I think both of them personally are quite ridiculous. Why limit your potential enjoyment of good music because of something that can have no effect on the music itself? Personally, I express things on the guitar that I would never express in words or actions to people. I'm sure my whole personality also feeds into it to some extent, but it comes out as something completely different. You may be able to slightly understand one better knowing the other, but they are seperate enough that they can be appriciated/loathed on their own.

Kearns states that it's easy to judge Wagner's and Marylin Manson's work taking into account who they are. Yes, it is easy. It's also unfair to you and the artist.