R. Kelly in court: Can you still hear your music?

R. Kelly
Are you still allowed to listen to your music?

R. Kelly

© E. Jason Wambsgans-Pool / Getty Images

The criminal trial of the former megastar R. Kelly has begun, the gruesome allegations of abuse and human trafficking are hard to bear. But: To what extent can or must one separate art and artist from one another? A comment. +++ Trigger warning: sexual abuse.

I recently went to a wedding. The mood was lively, we danced barefoot at three o’clock in the morning. Then the DJ put on the R. Kelly party hit “Fiesta”. Cheers from the celebrants. My stomach cramped and I left the dance floor. I just couldn’t and didn’t want to celebrate to a suspected perpetrator’s song. Many of my friends saw it differently and wanted to motivate me to dance again. Policy discussion at a friends wedding? Felt wrong somehow. Many found me radical, I found many ignorant. Is there an answer to the question of whether art and the person behind it can be separated? In any case, it is not easy …

R. Kelly: The process has started

A few days ago a criminal case against the former R’n’B superstar Robert “R.” Kelly (54). Kelly is currently charged with sexual exploitation of minors, human trafficking, obstruction of justice, and bribery in two ongoing federal trials and one criminal trial. The musician has been in prison since 2019 and rejects all allegations as a character assassination campaign. Still, there are few doubts about Kelly’s guilt, the statements of the stuff: Inside are cruel and shocking, there is also plenty of evidence.

In the USA, sex offenders are often referred to as “predators”: they want to kill their victims like prey and make them docile; they are trying to break their personality. Even in the documentary “Surviving R. Kelly”, which allows countless victims to have their say, Kelly’s manipulations were difficult to bear. Quite a few could not hear the descriptions of the atrocities. I couldn’t watch the series to the end either, many questions kept me awake at night: How infallible does a man have to consider himself to be to believe to get away with it? Why did no one believe these many women despite the overwhelming burden of proof – perhaps because they are not white? And also: Can you still hear the artist’s music? At least to that I had found a clear answer for myself: no.

I also loved the songs of the once legendary singer with the soft voice; they were my club anthems when I was a teenager. But can titles like “World’s Greatest”, “Sex me” and “Legs Shakin ‘” “still be blaring along with today’s knowledge? As with the aforementioned wedding celebration, my stomach is more likely to turn around. R. Kelly is accused of having used his fame purposefully to convince young girls, and also their parents, of his clean slate and his oh-so-good intentions. Behind literally closed doors, he then showed his monster face and destroyed lives. Today I don’t want to imagine what his inspirations for the songs were. Even if his songs were popular hits with catchy melodies, you shouldn’t measure him against them and heroize him.

Art and artist: inextricably linked?

This is of course not only true in the case of R. Kelly. The question of artistic inviolability also arises with other artists, even with the worst misconduct. What about Woody Allen films? What about Michael Jackson’s music? And how do you deal with series with Kevin Spacey or Bill Cosby? Are all of these people allowed to remain legends in their industry?

One thing is certain: unfair court hearings with offender-victim-reversing pleadings, a lack of admission of guilt and very good PR strategies (which only people with enough resources can afford) are not only the worst mockery for the survivors, but also usually ensure that many perpetrators come out of such processes with only small scratches in the image paint – and not with disrupted careers.

In the end, everyone has to: r answer the question for themselves and draw their own moral line. Nevertheless, we should at least think about whether we can identify with the values ​​and actions of our stars. Ultimately, they benefit from every stream, like or visit to the cinema, also in monetary terms.

The fact that genius and madness are literally close together, i.e. that good art justifies the mad artist, simply cannot be an excuse.

Brigitte