As expected, Monsters presented many insightful points about problematic artists and how we might think about consuming their work. What really struck me was how my pre-internet generation, and every generation that came before, had no real knowledge about the private lives of artists. It’s mind blowing how I can remember vividly the days when the only way you could see famous art, like a Monet or Klimt, was to buy a book, go to the library, or if you were lucky enough- the local art museum. (I absolutely remember the fervor of the Monet exhibit coming to the art institute of Chicago.) The information at our disposal in modern day is unwieldy, and it messes with all aspects of our lives.
Ultimately, not a single one of us is perfect, and that is Dederer’s final thought on the matter: that it is not up to us, individually, to fix these problematic artists, because boycotting won’t necessarily solve the problem. In the same way that giant corporations are the ones that need to step up to save our planet - not me buying reusable dish cloths and fancy hand soap refills. It takes a while for her to get to this point, and there was a lot of interesting food for thought on all sorts of the usual suspects of cancel culture (Picasso, Polanski, Woody Allen, JK Rowling). But I think it’s important for people to know about the problematic nature of art for context and understanding (especially with dated work), so they can decide if they would be uncomfortable consuming it, and not in the aim to solve some sort of problem. Anyway, this was a lot of food for thought, not handbook on how to deal with problematic people.