Comments on: Norman Manea on The Lasting Poison of Stalinism http://blog.theartsfuse.com/2009/01/22/norman-manea-on-the-lasting-poison-of-stalinism/ Commentary on the arts Thu, 18 Mar 2010 12:15:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: Tommy Wallach http://blog.theartsfuse.com/2009/01/22/norman-manea-on-the-lasting-poison-of-stalinism/comment-page-1/#comment-880 Tommy Wallach Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:33:20 +0000 http://blog.theartsfuse.com/2009/01/22/norman-manea-on-the-lasting-poison-of-stalinism/#comment-880 It seems that the greater an artist is, the more likely he or she is to get a moral bye. I think of Wagner, and Gunter Grass, and now Kundera. Perhaps it isn't even a double standard. Personally, I've always believed that being a bad artist is inherently morally wrong (in that you ought to be doing something less selfish with your time, if you truly don't have anything important to say to people). Maybe, when you're a truly great artist, nothing you do outside of creating that art should be allowed into the conversation. But as for a "nuanced" moral response, what does that really mean, practically? If we decide that Kundera did act immorally, should we refuse to purchase his books? <a href="http://www.tommywallach.com" rel="nofollow">Tommy Wallach</a> It seems that the greater an artist is, the more likely he or she is to get a moral bye. I think of Wagner, and Gunter Grass, and now Kundera. Perhaps it isn’t even a double standard. Personally, I’ve always believed that being a bad artist is inherently morally wrong (in that you ought to be doing something less selfish with your time, if you truly don’t have anything important to say to people). Maybe, when you’re a truly great artist, nothing you do outside of creating that art should be allowed into the conversation.

But as for a “nuanced” moral response, what does that really mean, practically? If we decide that Kundera did act immorally, should we refuse to purchase his books?

Tommy Wallach

]]>