Gary Glitter ..

[I1L2T3 10]

I think Adolf Hitler's watercolour paintings are very good. There, I've said it.

 

Do you own any Alan?

[carosio 186]

Alan Turing, considered to be the father of the modern computer, also became a criminal. He was later pardoned posthumously.

[nikki-red 308]

I think Adolf Hitler's watercolour paintings are very good. There, I've said it.

 

 

That's only really relevant if you liked them BEFORE it became apparent what kind of person he was.

[choogling 14]

yes that was part of my thinking , why is the music banned ? if all music , television , arts and so on were banned because of criminality , we wouldn't have much left

 

i never play gary glitter records on the disco not because of any ban but because of the possible reaction from the audience .

Edited August 5, 2017 by choogling

[I1L2T3 10]

That's only really relevant if you liked them BEFORE it became apparent what kind of person he was.

 

You never know, Alan could actually be 100 years old or more.

[Guest]

That's only really relevant if you liked them BEFORE it became apparent what kind of person he was.

 

Yes I see what you mean, but the op does raise questions about whether its "OK" to appreciate and like things regardless of who did them.

[melthebell 864]

Possibly because Gadd would still get royalties every-time his music is played.

and? his music has as already been pointed out created well before and has nothing to do with his peadophillia. you cant stop somebody earning what is rightfully theres from what they have created. and like i said its not right on the others in the band either.

 

both sets of activities are completely seperate

 

---------- Post added 05-08-2017 at 12:06 ----------

 

Alan Turing, considered to be the father of the modern computer, also became a criminal. He was later pardoned posthumously.

 

thats it, muddy the waters by trying to sneak together (yet again) being gay and peadophillia

[I1L2T3 10]

and? his music has as already been pointed out created well before and has nothing to do with his peadophillia. you cant stop somebody earning what is rightfully theres from what they have created. and like i said its not right on the others in the band either.

 

both sets of activities are completely seperate

 

---------- Post added 05-08-2017 at 12:06 ----------

 

 

thats it, muddy the waters by trying to sneak together (yet again) being gay and peadophillia

 

How do you know they were totally separate phases of his life?

 

It's unlikely he stopped being a pop star then started as a paedophile. It's more likely he was both, at the same time.

[apelike 10]

you cant stop somebody earning what is rightfully theres from what they have created. and like i said its not right on the others in the band either.

 

You may not stop it but it is possible to reduce it. I doubt the Glitter Band are missing out on much as Glitter wrote most of the stuff and would take the majority of the royalties anyway. The Glitter Band was basically his backing band and thats it, and I think most of their other material was written after they split in 1973.

[carosio 186]

thats it, muddy the waters by trying to sneak together (yet again) being gay and peadophillia

 

You're too quick to jump to conclusions!

 

My point was that he is a famous example of someone who invented something without which we would not be using this forum, yet he was sentenced as a criminal.

The fact that he was gay does not concern me in the slightest and I fully support the pardon he was granted.

[Olive 10]

Today's Pick of the Pops with Paul Gambachini just skipped over Gary Glitter. I was listening to an episode a while back that had to omit him and Jonathan King.

 

I'm a touch uncomfortable with the airbrushing of stuff like it never existed. A song's a song, people liked them and bought the records. What would happen if someone like John Lennon was found to have committed some heinous crime? Would we have to stop listening to the Beatles?

 

Michael Jackson's dubious activities don't stop his songs being played. Admittedly, he was never actually convicted of anything.

 

But Phil Spector's a convicted murderer and we all merrily listen to his (tremendous) tunes. Chuck Berry was no angel and he was lauded as a great and his songs played during his lifetime.

 

I think probably we'd be better off separating the music from the artist and leaving it at that, otherwise we get into all sorts of double standard tangles.

[hackey lad 3,980]

Today's Pick of the Pops with Paul Gambachini just skipped over Gary Glitter. I was listening to an episode a while back that had to omit him and Jonathan King.

 

I'm a touch uncomfortable with the airbrushing of stuff like it never existed. A song's a song, people liked them and bought the records. What would happen if someone like John Lennon was found to have committed some heinous crime? Would we have to stop listening to the Beatles?

 

Michael Jackson's dubious activities don't stop his songs being played. Admittedly, he was never actually convicted of anything.

 

But Phil Spector's a convicted murderer and we all merrily listen to his (tremendous) tunes. Chuck Berry was no angel and he was lauded as a great and his songs played during his lifetime.

 

I think probably we'd be better off separating the music from the artist and leaving it at that, otherwise we get into all sorts of double standard tangles.

 

I agree with all of that . Its history in one way or another and even though evil things happen ,is it right that it should airbrushed out of history?