My bedroom walls trembled as the electrifying rap song “Bound 2” by Ye blasted on the speakers. I nodded along to the catchy beats and lip-synced to the lyrics. A friend sitting across from me lifted her eyes up from her computer and tilted her head as she stared at me with a troubled look.
She proceeded to ask why I kept Ye on my playlist despite his malicious, antisemitic comments. With a hint of selfishness, I responded that we should be able to separate the art from the artist.
In October of 2022, Ye said on X he would be “going death con 3 On JEWISH PEOPLE,” and since then, the argument that we should be able to separate the art from the artist has been plaguing me. I, and the rest of the internet, have been conflicted about whether or not it is ethical to continue to listen to Ye’s sensational music, debating if it is possible to separate Ye’s masterpieces from Ye’s beliefs.
Proponents of keeping Ye in our playlists argue art can be separated from the artist, while others think artists will always be attached to their art — but I disagree with both.
We should not claim a work of art is distasteful just because the artist has behaved poorly. We should recognize that art can be differentiated from the character of the artist. Appreciating the quality of a work of art, and indulging in it, does not mean we endorse the actions of the artist.
If we were in an art museum and found a compelling piece of art, we wouldn’t come to the conclusion the piece was praiseworthy by scrutinizing the artist and their beliefs. Take Pablo Picasso for one, who is renowned as one of the most influential artists today. He is undoubtedly artistically gifted with millions applauding his art, yet, a little research on his past reveals that he abused many young women and maintained many affairs.
We decide art is appealing because we admire the elements making up the art itself without admiring the artist.
Thus, if we previously thought Ye’s music was good, our view on the quality of his music should not change simply because our view of Ye as a person changed.
We should be able to acknowledge Ye’s talent for tying his music with his lyrics has made his albums some of the greatest of all time. At the same time, we should be able to do so while condemning his wrongful actions. Separating the art from the artist in this manner should be completely valid.
However, once we understand that listening to Ye’s music pays his bills and gives him a platform, we cannot separate the art from the artist. By listening to his music, we are encouraging him to make more and to perform on more tours. In doing so, we are essentially implying that our love for his music is enough to disregard his antisemitic statements. With 72 million monthly Spotify listeners, if each one listened to five Ye songs per month, he would make $1.7 million per month solely from Spotify streams.
Asserting that we are separating the art from the artists is a lazy excuse for the real, underlying motive: favoring listening to enjoyable music over condemning discriminatory and harmful words. Rather than using the phrase, “separate the art from the artist,” every time we crave moral justification for listening to a musician who has done problematic things, it would be more honest to admit we cherish their music too much to remove them from our playlist.
I recognize now that I’ve been guilty of using the same silly excuse for months, hoping to avoid accusations of endorsing Ye’s insensitive remarks while still indulging in his music. Despite this, further self-reflection has led me to acknowledge the real implications of listening to Ye. I have officially removed Ye’s music from all my playlists, and I urge you to reflect on your moral standards and your genuine rationale behind separating the art from the artist.