To support student journalism and the content you love, become a member of The Daily Orange today.

The headline, Rex Orange County: musician charged with six counts of sexual assault, is plastered across my Instagram feed. An otherwise mindless scroll through the home page screeches to a halt. Alex O’Connor – the artist known as Rex Orange County – allegedly sexually assaulted a woman six times on June 2, 2022, information that was made public on Oct.10, 2022.

O’Connor is the latest in a long line of celebrities who have slammed their own careers on the chopping block this way. In this age of rapidly circulated information and platforms available to every witness and victim, the case of an artist’s career crumbling overnight is growing increasingly common.

Chris Brown for his exposed history of domestic violence. R.Kelly for his vile relations with underaged girls. Artists can no longer hide behind their talent and elude consequences for their personal wrongdoings. Yet, the aftermath of reading headlines like O’Connor’s is tricky. We hover over the “liked” button of a favorite song, weighing that existential question: can we truly separate the art from the artist?

It is easy to imagine the dreamy atmosphere of O’Connor’s hit “Pluto Projector” as the soundtrack to a first kiss. For someone, it likely served as the perfect accompaniment to that moment, forever associated with the song playing in the background. That’s one reason why it becomes difficult to throw out a song from our personal libraries, and maybe why we should not be forced to do so.

Art speaks to the soul, as songs embed themselves in our memories. Most of us have, intentionally or unintentionally, listened to a song that brought us right back to a particular moment and triggered a nostalgic smile. To be expected to give up that work forever is, in a way, to steal from our past and deprive our current selves from a part of us.

In an academic setting, jumping to discard works of a problematic artist may be dangerous to arts education. The 19th century German composer Richard Wagner is remembered not only as a prolific musician but also as an antisemite. In our increasingly tolerant society, there should be no excuse for such foul opinions. However, to ignore Wagner’s contributions to music history and leave his work out of music curriculum for his offensive viewpoints damages the education of young musicians. Students’ understanding of opera music, where Wagner is most influential, would be stunted.

But in that same breath, to continue to celebrate these artists as individuals is to idolize a deeply flawed person who should go without celebration. It is important that we don’t put artists like O’Connor on a pedestal as a person and applaud their character or their personalities, as we often do with celebrities. For all of O’Connor’s odes to love and romance, a woman claims he committed the most unromantic and unloving of acts upon her. It should be her word against his, devoid of his celebrity status. It is important that he does not reach the same level of success after his sins have come to light.

We should treat these scandals as a “threshold” point: the music released before the fact carries its own significance to listeners and music history, true, but after the fact we must respond decisively. Deplatforming artists for such gross misconduct as racist rants and sexual assault sends a strong message about the threat of consequence at all levels of fame and status. We should hold artists accountable for their behavior and put their career at stake.

We must consume the work of problematic people with an asterisk. The person with the capacity to put out such beautiful and celebrated music also has the capacity to commit appalling offenses. Separating the art from the artist is an active process that we, the listeners, have to make an effort to achieve.

Neil Vijayan is a Freshman English and Textual Studies major. His column appears bi-weekly, and he can be reached at [email protected].

Published on October 20, 2022 at 12:02 am