We’re not used to famous pedophiles having a great talent; perhaps because all of their drive goes into their secret obsession, they’re generally just operators with a lot of front. It’s been easy to slice the cultural contributions of, say, Jerry Sandusky from one’s life and not feel the least absence.

If the chattering classes are allowed to keep their Eric Gill, why can’t the dancing classes keep Michael Jackson?

If the chattering classes are allowed to keep their Eric Gill, why can’t the dancing classes keep Michael Jackson?

On the other hand, we’re inclined to give Caravaggio a pass, as he was such a great painter as well as a boy-abusing murderer – and it was such a long time ago, that the victims can’t speak out. The same goes for the pedophile Paul Gauguin, who spent many years spreading syphilis among a proportion of the girl children of Tahiti. That Eric Gill had a nice way with fonts is undeniable. Still, considering the number of pedophiles they have promoted and protected – and their performative contrition in recent years – it’s odd how in Britain the BBC still glorifies this enthusiastic rapist of his daughters and the family dog. In 2022, a man took a hammer to Gill’s “Prospero And Ariel” sculpture outside the BBC’s headquarters, with a quite reasonable cry of “Pedophile!” The BBC’s response was to spend more than $650,000 restoring it and placing a protective screen around it. Hug an incestuous kiddie diddler today!

For those of us with more lowbrow tastes, Michael Jackson is the “problematic” artist we struggle with – or, to be more accurate, wonder briefly whether it’s worth switching radio stations when one of his songs comes on. (Many of them banned his records after the horrific revelations of the Leaving Neverland documentary but have sneaked them back on since.) Should we shun his recordings, having heard the revolting testimonies of his victims? Or should we separate the man (who’s dead anyway, so it’s not like he’s........

© The Spectator