Where do we separate the artist and their work? Moreover, can we still enjoy creative works when the creator has been disgraced by engaging in heinous activities in their personal life?

It is a discussion that is much had lately, for we live in times when a specific lens is being applied to anyone whose head comes above a particular parapet. It even applies to people from the past, for whom crimes of the present can be retroactively fitted. Indeed, they are being 'fitted up' in every way possible.

I recently watched a few seasons of the remake of "House Of Cards" and was made to feel, in some circles, that I should not be watching Kevin Spacey under any circumstances. I love Woody Allen movies but you can imagine how this goes down with a certain fraternity. Still, I laboured through, the willing suspension of disbelief carrying the day.

Recently I chanced upon the old Glitter rocker, "Hello, Hello, It's Good To Be Back", one of the best glam rock songs of the 1970's. Glitter never appealed to me much as a teenager but I'm happy to give credit where it's due. Naturally, I feel conflicted by listening to a song by a man who abused children over two continents and is still serving a prison sentence. Yet still I enjoyed it. Somehow I could separate the man from his work. To be honest, it wasn't that difficult.

The cleansing of anything that does not come up to some arbitrary standard - and this is sadly yet another utopian project of the left - will always fall upon the incoherence of its logic. People are flawed in all sorts of ways. Artists, political and religious leaders, ordinary folks too, all fall short of the high bar that has been set, the bar which moves with the times. Many too are disturbed by the peremptory responses demanded. 

I hope we can step back from the wilful craziness that will ensue if matters are taken to a logical conclusion.