Books: November 2007 Archives

This blog post from the Hermenautic Circle discusses the re-publishing of Tintin in the Congo, an early Hergé comic that features stereotyped and frankly racist depictions of the Congoese and of Africans in general.

The question, the article raises, isn't so much about the book, but about whether the existence of this book affects one's enjoyment and appreciation of Hergé's other works.

This is a question asked in this BBC News Magazine article, which discusses Brian Daveys. Daveys was a respected music teacher and textbook writer, and also a paedophile. The article also mentions Eric Gill, famous sculptor and typographer, who after his death it was discovered that he regularly had sex with his daughters, his sister, and his dog.

Do the views or actions of these people degrade their creations? Do they change them? This question has further implications, for example do Chomsky's political leanings affect his linguistic theories?

Where this is concerned with intellectual pursuits it's generally easier to determine things. If someone believes that black people are racially inferior to white people, then we can feel justified in our rejection of their treatise on human diversity. If someone is a notorious career criminal, we can take their writings on moral philosophy with a pinch of salt.¹

But with art it's different. What about the racist's symphony? Is it also inherently racist? Or the criminal's paintings?

I propose what is perhaps an obvious answer. It only really matters if it's something directly related. So, for example, for Daveys to write a music textbook while being a paedophile is fine. It's not as if he's writing a children's story, or guidelines on how to run a creche. Gill blurs the boundaries a little. While I would suggest that the majority of his work, especially his typefaces, are essentially unaffected by his paraphilia, it would be naïve of me to claim that his nude sketches of his daughter are unsullied by his background.

This question goes deeper. How much does one's private life impact upon one's public life? I think an important example is the Monica Lewinsky affair - where President Bill Clinton was found to be having an extramarital affair. There was a media uproar, which lead to Bill lying to congress, which lead to his being impeached. Arguably, if the US media cared less about his private life, none of that would have happened. Did his lack of integrity as a husband affect his integrity as a world leader? Does it matter?

I'm good at asking questions. I'm not so good at answering them.

¹ That doesn't mean we should dismiss it out of hand, of course.