This is not a Design post it's an article post but i don't know why there's no option to post written article here, anyways postings whole article down below:

Art is a form of expression that allows individuals to communicate their thoughts, emotions, and experiences to the world. It can take many forms, including painting, sculpture, music, dance, literature, and more. Despite its diverse range, art is often associated with the artist who created it, and their personal beliefs and actions can have a significant impact on how their work is perceived and received by audiences. This raises the question: should art be separated from its artist?

On one hand, it can be argued that an artist's personal life and beliefs should not influence the interpretation of their work. Art is meant to be evaluated on its own merits, not on the reputation of the person who created it. For example, an artist may have made racist or sexist statements in their personal life, but this does not necessarily mean that their work should be judged as racist or sexist. Similarly, an artist's political or religious beliefs should not impact the value or relevance of their work.

Separating art from its artist also allows for a more objective evaluation of the work. It can prevent personal biases from clouding our judgment, and allow us to appreciate the work for what it is, rather than who created it. This is particularly important in the context of art that is meant to challenge societal norms or push boundaries, as it can be tempting to dismiss or ignore the work if we have negative feelings towards the artist.

In addition, many great works of art are created by individuals who lived in different times and cultural contexts, and their beliefs and values may not align with our own. For example, a painting created by a European artist in the 16th century may contain racist or sexist imagery that would be considered unacceptable today. If we were to judge the work based on the artist's personal beliefs, we would be missing out on the opportunity to appreciate the historical and cultural context in which the work was created.

On the other hand, there are valid reasons for considering the artist's personal life and beliefs when evaluating their work. Art is often a reflection of the artist's experiences, thoughts, and values, and it can provide valuable insight into their perspectives and motivations. Additionally, the reputation of an artist can have a significant impact on the market value and cultural significance of their work. In some cases, the notoriety of an artist may even enhance the appreciation and interpretation of their work.

Furthermore, the actions of an artist can be so reprehensible that they overshadow their work, making it difficult or impossible to separate the two. For example, a musician who has been convicted of a serious crime may find it challenging to continue performing or releasing new music because their personal reputation has been tarnished. In these cases, the artist's actions can have a direct impact on the reception and appreciation of their work, and it may be appropriate to consider their personal life when evaluating their work.

In conclusion, the relationship between art and its artist is complex, and there is no straightforward answer to the question of whether art should be separated from its artist. On one hand, separating art from its artist allows for a more objective evaluation of the work and prevents personal biases from clouding our judgment. On the other hand, an artist's personal life and beliefs can provide valuable insight into their perspectives and motivations, and their actions can have a direct impact on the reception and appreciation of their work. Ultimately, the decision to separate art from its artist will depend on the specific circumstances and context, and should be made on a case-by-case basis.