All or Nothing?

An addendum to what I was banging on about on Monday - perhaps the thing I find most irksome about the 'comedy isn't as good as it used to be in the 1980s' brigade is their implied 'all or nothing' attitude. Apparently, if a comedian offends you by cracking a joke you don't like, or holding an opinion that differs from yours, you have to condemn their entire act, burn all your DVDs of them and shout abuse at them every time they're on TV. Oh, not to forget to try and harass them on Twitter. Conversely, if you happen to think they're 'right on', then you have to uncritically accept, and laugh at, their entire body of work. Oh, not to forget to send them sycophantic Tweets.

Personally, I beg to differ from this attitude. Just because Ricky Gervais chooses to use the word 'mong' now, doesn't mean to say that I have to repudiate my enjoyment of The Office, for instance. (Granted, his attitude might make me want to re-evaluate some of his stand up act, but that's slightly different). By the same token, just because I've enjoyed one thing an artist has done doesn't mean that I automatically assume that I'll uncritically accept their future output. I know that we all want the public figures we like and whose work we respect to have the same values and ideals as us, but the reality is that they are just ordinary human beings, entitled to their own views and opinions. We see only one facet of their lives - their work - and have no right to expect that this reflects their private lives. Sure, it is nice when you find some celebrity whose work you like turns out to have similar private views to your own, but it isn't essential for ones continued enjoyment of their output. I mean, I hear that Arnold Schwarzenegger is a bit right-wing, but that isn't going to stop me from enjoying the Terminator movies, (the first two, at least)...