Obviously given everything I've heard that this was inevitable but this sort of thing always brings up a question for me.

 

I have read here and from friends that they will delete or never listen to them again. I can't say I don't understand their feelings and I have no conflicting feelings as I never liked them anyway but given that Watkins is only a 5th of the band and not the sole architect of their music should we permanently ignore their work?

If you take music as an art form as much as entertainment (which I do) where exactly do we draw the line?

Glitter has effectively been almost retconned out of musical history so should we be doing the same with Walt Disney and Richard Wagner? They were both anti semites. Hugo Boss was a Nazi sympathiser who designed their uniforms.

James Brown was known to have beaten his wife senseless many times. So too Ike Turner.

Jerry Lee Lewis and Bill Wyman both married and admitted to sexual encounters with underage women. Steven Tyler in 1975 began dating a 14 year old girl and had her parents sign her guardianship over to him. Innocent? Perhaps but likely? You decide. Chuck Berry was arrested for taking underage girls across state lines and the daddy of them all Elvis Presley began dating Priscilla when she was just 14 years old. Although she maintains they didn't have sex until their wedding night many dispute that claim, particularly as she gave birth 9 months later to the day. He was also known for surrounding himself with young girls according to several sources.

 

My point is should the art be kept seperate from the actions? If we took this stance over every piece of work created by someone who was convicted of a vile crime no matter how much we feel we should then how much great art would we lose? I've only mentioned musicians because that's what I am most familiar with. I haven't even looked into film, painting, literature or theatre and I suspect there are many there throughout history.

I own two of their albums, but I certainly can't listen to anything of theirs now no matter how much I previously enjoyed it. It just gives me too many feelings of discomfort and taints it.

Obviously given everything I've heard that this was inevitable but this sort of thing always brings up a question for me.

 

I have read here and from friends that they will delete or never listen to them again. I can't say I don't understand their feelings and I have no conflicting feelings as I never liked them anyway but given that Watkins is only a 5th of the band and not the sole architect of their music should we permanently ignore their work?

If you take music as an art form as much as entertainment (which I do) where exactly do we draw the line?

Glitter has effectively been almost retconned out of musical history so should we be doing the same with Walt Disney and Richard Wagner? They were both anti semites. Hugo Boss was a Nazi sympathiser who designed their uniforms.

James Brown was known to have beaten his wife senseless many times. So too Ike Turner.

Jerry Lee Lewis and Bill Wyman both married and admitted to sexual encounters with underage women. Steven Tyler in 1975 began dating a 14 year old girl and had her parents sign her guardianship over to him. Innocent? Perhaps but likely? You decide. Chuck Berry was arrested for taking underage girls across state lines and the daddy of them all Elvis Presley began dating Priscilla when she was just 14 years old. Although she maintains they didn't have sex until their wedding night many dispute that claim, particularly as she gave birth 9 months later to the day. He was also known for surrounding himself with young girls according to several sources.

 

My point is should the art be kept seperate from the actions? If we took this stance over every piece of work created by someone who was convicted of a vile crime no matter how much we feel we should then how much great art would we lose? I've only mentioned musicians because that's what I am most familiar with. I haven't even looked into film, painting, literature or theatre and I suspect there are many there throughout history.

 

THIS THIS THIS f***ING THIS.

I think there was a thread a while ago about that (^), its an interesting question and in some cases, I think its fair to appreciate their art rather than the person in some cases, BUT I believe there has to be an exceptions when their crime is just too disgusting that it overshadows their work - whilst all those you mention are extremely horrible, we're talking about the attempted RAPE OF A BABY (OK, attempted but almost as bad) here and a 'determined and committed paedophile' - There is no way I'd be able to overlook that and listen to their songs as normal. I just wouldn't be able to get that horrible image out of my head.

 

There are numerous crimes that cross the line where I can't separate man and art form - Sexual abuse to children under 13 is one of them, its almost on par with murder for me. Just sickening.

Edited November 26, 201311 yr by Chez Wombat

I own two of their albums, but I certainly can't listen to anything of theirs now no matter how much I previously enjoyed it. It just gives me too many feelings of discomfort and taints it.

 

Can you listen to Phil Spector records after he was charged for shooting a woman in the mouth?

 

It seems as if paedophilia is more disgusting in the eyes of the public than murder. They should be treated under the same premises, I think.

Edited November 26, 201311 yr by Tommy G

By the way, I'm devastated and upset that he could do something like this. Where We Belong was an incredible record and my friend was a massive fan, so I can only wonder what he's thinking :(

Can you listen to Phil Spector records after he was charged for shooting a woman in the mouth?

 

I don't really anyway, so it doesn't bother me.

 

Lostprophets had some good songs, but they're not an essential band so it's not a huge loss if I stop listening to their music.

Obviously given everything I've heard that this was inevitable but this sort of thing always brings up a question for me.

 

I have read here and from friends that they will delete or never listen to them again. I can't say I don't understand their feelings and I have no conflicting feelings as I never liked them anyway but given that Watkins is only a 5th of the band and not the sole architect of their music should we permanently ignore their work?

If you take music as an art form as much as entertainment (which I do) where exactly do we draw the line?

Glitter has effectively been almost retconned out of musical history so should we be doing the same with Walt Disney and Richard Wagner? They were both anti semites. Hugo Boss was a Nazi sympathiser who designed their uniforms.

James Brown was known to have beaten his wife senseless many times. So too Ike Turner.

Jerry Lee Lewis and Bill Wyman both married and admitted to sexual encounters with underage women. Steven Tyler in 1975 began dating a 14 year old girl and had her parents sign her guardianship over to him. Innocent? Perhaps but likely? You decide. Chuck Berry was arrested for taking underage girls across state lines and the daddy of them all Elvis Presley began dating Priscilla when she was just 14 years old. Although she maintains they didn't have sex until their wedding night many dispute that claim, particularly as she gave birth 9 months later to the day. He was also known for surrounding himself with young girls according to several sources.

 

My point is should the art be kept seperate from the actions? If we took this stance over every piece of work created by someone who was convicted of a vile crime no matter how much we feel we should then how much great art would we lose? I've only mentioned musicians because that's what I am most familiar with. I haven't even looked into film, painting, literature or theatre and I suspect there are many there throughout history.

 

Valid points and i agree

 

But

 

I would not be able to listen to a Lostprophets song again without my blood boiling at what he did

 

I saw them live several times, owned just about every studio cd

 

I don't think i can listen now and contain my anger at the same time

 

We are not talking about 14/15 year olds here, they are past puberty, many that age are sexually active, we are talking about a BABY

 

I feel physically sick just thinking about this case

Edited November 26, 201311 yr by Sandro Raniere

Valid points and i agree

 

But

 

I would not be able to listen to a Lostprophets song again without my blood boiling at what he did

 

I saw them live several times, owned just about every studio cd

 

I don't think i can listen now and contain my anger at the same time

 

We are not talking about 14/15 year olds here, they are past puberty, many that age are sexually active, we are talking about a BABY

 

I feel physically sick just thinking about this case

The average age for a first sexual experience is 16 as it has been for at least 20 years. Obviously, by definition, it is younger than that for many people but it is not as prevalent as many people think.

 

It is still true though that the involvement of a baby makes this far worse. It is possible to understand that somebody might convince themselves that a 12-year-old has given informed consent. However, nobody can be deluded enough to think that of a baby.

The average age for a first sexual experience is 16 as it has been for at least 20 years. Obviously, by definition, it is younger than that for many people but it is not as prevalent as many people think.

 

It is still true though that the involvement of a baby makes this far worse. It is possible to understand that somebody might convince themselves that a 12-year-old has given informed consent. However, nobody can be deluded enough to think that of a baby.

 

Exactly, if it had been an underage female here who was past the age of puberty i would think 'ewww gross :wacko: ' but it would not put me off listening to the artist, pop stars shagging groupies is not unusual and many can be underage legally

 

But a baby is a whole different ballgame, repugnant on every level imaginable

 

If the rest of the band reform under a new name i would listen to the music but the Lostprophets brand is tarnished forever beyond repair imho

Edited November 26, 201311 yr by Sandro Raniere

I do think that modern society needs to take a fresh look at paedophilia and encourage treatment for it. It would not happen for a long time if ever though.

I do think that modern society needs to take a fresh look at paedophilia and encourage treatment for it. It would not happen for a long time if ever though.

 

I think they need to redefine paedophilia

 

Technically that teacher is a paedophile because he had sex with a 15 year old, that is not proper paedophilia

 

People should only be classed as a paedophile if they are involved with a prepubescent

I do think that modern society needs to take a fresh look at paedophilia and encourage treatment for it. It would not happen for a long time if ever though.

Absolutely right. I would imagine that Watkins had felt the urge to do something like this before but had resisted it. Of course he is responsible for his actions and he should at the very least made sure he never got drunk and never got high on drugs. However, I don't think there is anywhere he could go to seek help. Obviously trying to find a suitable organisation via Google would have been a huge risk.

 

We are now reasonably tolerant of people who seek help for alcoholism and we need to be more tolerant of people who recognise that they have a problem with their sexual urges and try to do something about it.

 

I was about to post something along these lines before you gave me an obvious opening.

I think they need to redefine paedophilia

 

Technically that teacher is a paedophile because he had sex with a 15 year old, that is not proper paedophilia

 

People should only be classed as a paedophile if they are involved with a prepubescent

I think technically that is the proper definition but it has gradually been widened to include all under-age children. We have the tabloid press to thank for that.

Absolutely right. I would imagine that Watkins had felt the urge to do something like this before but had resisted it. Of course he is responsible for his actions and he should at the very least made sure he never got drunk and never got high on drugs. However, I don't think there is anywhere he could go to seek help. Obviously trying to find a suitable organisation via Google would have been a huge risk.

 

We are now reasonably tolerant of people who seek help for alcoholism and we need to be more tolerant of people who recognise that they have a problem with their sexual urges and try to do something about it.

 

I was about to post something along these lines before you gave me an obvious opening.

 

He could have applied to be chemically castrated

 

I have read instances before of people with sexual urges towards children having chemical castration and the urges were heavily minimised or gone completely after

He could have applied to be chemically castrated

 

I have read instances before of people with sexual urges towards children having chemical castration and the urges were heavily minimised or gone completely after

But it must still be incredibly difficult to summon up the courage to ask for that even if you know that it is a possibility.

But it must still be incredibly difficult to summon up the courage to ask for that even if you know that it is a possibility.

 

True but instead he is going to probably be in prison for the next 15 years and then be looking over his shoulder for the rest of his life, a lot harder option than plucking up the courage to be chemically castrated

An abhorrent incident. Sickened just reading the details.

 

On the subject of separating the artist's misdemeanours from their craft, I fully get that. A lot of my most admired film directors/artists were controversial to the nth degree and I can't help but feel it adds a dimension to watching/analysing their works. I obviously haven't supported every decision made by the likes of Roman Polanksi to use one example, but having studied him in depth and channeling his "real-life" actions through his cinema you can really take a lot from it. There's obviously a lot that goes into the works and not just these isolated incidents but I could never not watch one of his films after reading about his life (if anything I'm MORE inclined to search out everything he's ever done). He was obviously guilty of similar charges and has had a very coloured life outside of this too.

 

Having said that I really only know a handful of LP songs and nowhere near enough to make a judgement so apologies for going off on a slight tangent.

I understand it's not really logical but after hearing this kind of news (or even something much less severe) most music of an artist/band involved just becomes a bunch of fart sounds to my ears :( Kelis, Chris Brown, LostProphets. Not that I was a fan of LostProphets in the first place (I remember liking only one song tbh) but still.

 

Absolutely appalling, I hope he rots in jail. To think that he was probably doing this whilst his albums were at #1 and he was being publicly adored.

 

Fearne Cotton must feel rather sick at this moment too.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/artic...gh-Francis.html

 

If she does then she's not showing it :D

Fearne and Ian Watkins were together for less than a year and this was nearly 10 years ago so it probably hasn't affected her as much as people think. She probably feels just as sickened by the news as the rest of us do.

 

I agree about separating the art from the person, I've got a few Lostprophets tracks in my collection and I really like some of their early stuff - I did consider deleting it but decided that would be stupid. Having said that, I haven't listened to any of it lately, and I don't know how it will make me feel when I do.

 

And on the subject of how to treat paedophilia, personally I think it should be treated like a mental illness as well as a crime because essentially that's what it is. If there were support groups where people could go to seek help then perhaps more children would be safer from such vile and sickening crimes against them. But as has been said, I can imagine it would be extremely difficult for someone to actually open up to a support group about their paedophiliac urges.

Edited November 27, 201311 yr by mango