Do Prolific Artworks Lose their Merit due to Deplorable Behavior Committed by their Creators?

When it comes to movies and famous celebrities, if it comes to light that a famous actor committed a heinous crime many people will not only protest that actor getting work in the future, but any new movies that are being released where that actor plays a role. Just recently, Johnny Depp was fired from Warner Bros. and will no longer be taking part in the future Fantastic Beasts films due to reprehensible behavior he committed against his ex-wife. As cancel culture is more popular than ever in the mainstream media, one has to wonder how people would feel about famous visual artists if they knew what they got up to in their personal lives. 

Many people would be surprised or even shocked to find out some of the most famous visual artists in art history are not exactly saints, in fact, far from it. For many of these artists, their behavior in their personal lives would definitely not fly today and some of them were found guilty of committing some of the most abhorrent crimes imaginable.

Let’s begin with a common theme found throughout the lives of many famous artists of the past: misogyny. The first may surprise many as he is famous for introducing another famous female artist into the French art scene and eventual notoriety: Edgar Degas. Degas is perhaps most well-known for his depictions of young ballerinas and assisting Mary Cassatt in her rise to prominence in the French art world. Even though Degas helped Cassatt, he did not allow her into his artistic creation circles with other prominent artists of the time simply because she was a woman. 

Edgar Degas, The Ballet Class, 1874, The Metropolitan Museum of Art

In terms of the subjects of his paintings, what many do not realize is the sad reality of these young ballerinas who were forced to work all hours of the day and most became ballerinas due to their families’ extreme poverty. When they came of age (about preteen age) they were sometimes sold to wealthy men. So essentially, these picturesque scenes of young, handsome ballerinas portrayed by Degas are not only a fable, but he is exploiting these girls’ sad life for his own gain. What’s even more horrifying to learn about Degas is the downright contempt he had towards women. In some interviews of his close friends, they discussed this animosity and even joked that women should stay away from Degas for their own safety.

Another artist with similar views towards women is, unfortunately, Pablo Picasso. As he is perhaps the most widely-known artist of all time, this is very disheartening as a young feminist art historian like myself. Picasso had many sordid affairs with many women, some of which we can see he used as muses in his paintings. As he became older, these women seemed to be younger and younger. He seemed to prefer strong women because he would get into verbal matches with them and these women tended to hold their ground. He was known to have mistresses while still married to other women. Further, he was once quoted, “Women are machines for suffering.” He also famously told his mistress once (whom he was forty years her senior at the time), “For me, there are only two types of women, goddesses and doormats.” Needless to say, Picasso did not have a lot of respect for women. 

Pablo Picasso, Weeping Woman, 1937, Tate Museum

The next examination follows an artist who was convicted of criminal activity so please read with caution. Egon Schiele is perhaps less known than the two prior artists, but in the art community he has typically been held with high regard due to the execution of his artworks. His figural drawings and paintings have captivated audiences due to the romantic yet eerie nature of his depiction of his subjects. Many times his subjects were rendered in the nude and alarmingly skinny. The grotesque portrayals of his subjects could have been an indicator into his disturbed temperament.

Egon Schiele, Seated Female Nude, Elbows Resting on Right Knee, 1914, Erich Lessing Culture and Fine Arts Archive

His depictions of nude women are haunting in particular because they perfectly capture these anxiety-inducing moments through sharp angles and fully embracing flesh against sharp bones. Her gaze towards the audience shows how uncomfortable the subject feels as her arms attempt to cover a part of her nude figure. The way in which her hip bone is about to cut through her skin is remarkably startling for the viewer and forces one to contemplate the headspace of the artist. There is confirmation of Schiele’s disturbed psyche because in 1911, his studio outside of Vienna was well-known to be a meeting place for underprivileged children and Schiele was soon arrested for the seducing and abduction of a minor. He subsequently spent twenty-four days in jail for the crime. Children rarely appeared in his artworks after this incident.

More recently, allegations have been made against the contemporary artist, Chuck Close. His innovative use of photography and intimate portrayal of his subjects led Close to secure his place as a staple contemporary artist. He even had the honor of creating the presidential portrait for President Bill Clinton. In some of his most famous artworks, he uses himself as his inspiration in self-portraits.

Chuck Close, Big Self-Portrait 1967-1968, 1967-1968, The Walker Art Museum

Beginning in late 2017, sexual allegations arose against Close and more women popped up in 2018 with similar allegations. These women all have similar accounts of being invited to Close’s studio and being asked to undress for him. He said lewd things to them, some even saying that he touched them inappropriately and asked them to touch themselves in a sexual manner. These women say that they left the inappropriate interaction feeling coerced and very uncomfortable by the events that transpired.

Close has since apologized for these acts but claims that he frequently has auditions for his nude photography. Despite his assertion, the National Gallery of Art in Washington cancelled an upcoming solo exhibition of Close’s artworks due to the sexual misconduct allegations.

After learning about these disgraceful behaviors committed by some of art history’s most integral players, how can one look at these artists and their artworks in the same way? It also makes one wonder if their artworks’ merit can be respected on an individual level and without connection to the artist that created them. 

As the National Gallery of Art in Washington asserted by cancelling the solo exhibition of Close’s works, they believe that his artworks do not hold their own individual merit.

Although created by reprehensible artists, it could be argued that these artworks could have been held in high-esteem without the influence of their creator on the viewer. Holding these artists accountable for their actions and behaviors very much should be done or at least considered despite the fact that the majority of these artists have been dead for many years. 

One can argue that without the artworks created by these artists, that movements may not have been created and therefore art history as we know it today would be frightfully different. These artworks inspired other artists and debatably make art history more vibrant and more expansive for having been created; even the more macabre ones. 

That being said, this discussion leaves one considering if arts institutions should stop displaying artworks by these artists. What would be lost and gained by taking these actions? Would people lose a huge part of the art historical narrative that is needed in order to understand the narrative fully? Or, is it worth giving those things up because it is the moral thing to do?

Trying to alleviate this issue is far from simple. For instance, if one starts removing these artworks from arts institutions, where does it end? Art history is abound with sexism due to the fact that female artists weren’t taken seriously until basically the last century. Can all the problems in art history be rectified without erasure?

For many, losing the ability to view these artworks would be a tragedy. For one thing, art many times teaches us how to do and be better. It can teach us to learn from the past and to progress into a better collective and individual.

For me, I know I would lose a lot by not having the ability to view these artworks because not only are they so aesthetically valuable, but they give me so much fulfillment to learn about their stories and how they were executed. However, I’m still conflicted. Nevertheless, people need to make decisions for themselves on what is the right action to take for themselves without influence from others. Thus, the debate should rightly continue.