For one, never watched Usual Suspects nor House of Cards, never appealed to me really, so I guess I can't really say either way. In fact, I don't think I have actually watched anything with him in it. So yes, in that case I can separate the actor from the movies, because if I were to watch it, not really knowing him through his movies, it wouldn't really impact me. I read far more as a child and teen (even now really) than I did watch movies. That and I was outside a lot but that's a whole different topic.
As for Woody Allen, yeah I can watch them. I know he's a weird and sketchy person (I'm trying to avoid the profanity filter as I had other choice words for his behavior), but that's him and not the art. Sure, it puts a whole new perspective on the move Manhatten, but not enough to make me drop it completely. In honesty, I think I watched that movie twice in my whole life, and one of the times was for a school thing...I can't remember what for, but I remember sitting in class watching it and pausing it here and there to talk about stuff with the teacher. You can enjoy things without the person that made them, you can enjoy pieces of art, books, items, music, all without having any affiliation with the artist. I don't worship these people, nor do I give a single flying pig about what nonsense they have decided to ruin their career with. They want to do their nonsense, let them; not my bigtop, not my circus. None of that takes away from the piece itself for me.
As for Austrian Artist Turned Poitician, you're right, a lot of people won't separate the "art from the artist" as it were, I certainly won't (personal family stuff). Though, you will have people point to numbers and stats during his political run and before he "put his art on display" as it were, that the numbers show that he was doing good for his country. Even if that were the case, and lets assume they are right; that's a small fraction of good he did against a whole torrent of bad. Though, couldn't this be part of the topic of accepting all sides from things from the past? How do I put this...If we are willing to accept that people did a few garbage things while on the whole being a overall okay person, and that we to reflect on that and try not to repeat it; should we not then accept that an overall garbage scum person did a few good things, even by accident, and that we reflect on that and try to figure out how to do those good things without the garbage parts? For the record, I'm in no way trying to make this Austrian Artist Turn Politician into anything sympathetic or whatever, I'll be the first to fight anyone trying to make it a legit thing. I'm merely using it as an example to try and get my point across here. I don't know if it's coming across properly...I'm sorry if it's not. Overall what I'm trying to say is, we need to acknowledge all sides of a person's history, as well as history as a whole, learn from it, and hope to never repeat the bad, and build on the good.
You're right those, everyone's limits are their own and if someone chooses to not buy something, participate in something, or use something because of a person associated with it and their flaws, that's perfectly alright for them, there ar epeopel that are goign to do it in celebration of those flaws which...well it's weird, but that's there perogative I guess, and there are those that are in between that will make their own choices. Everyone needs to respect those choices and let people be.
