When the Oscar nominations were announced last month, the names of Mel Gibson and Casey Affleck were more of a talking point than the usual debates about snubs, surprises and whether Jennifer Lawrence will fall down one more time on the red carpet. The furor surrounding their nominations? The re-ignition of the debate about separating art from the artist, especially when that artist is embroiled in controversy. Erstwhile Hollywood pariah Gibson's war film Hacksaw Ridge scored six Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Editing, and yes, the exalted Best Director. This marks his second Oscar nomination for Best Director pr- the first was for Braveheart which he won in 1996, on top of taking home the Best Picture statuette. Gibson directing actors in his war film "Hacksaw Ridge" This endorsement from the Academy completes Gibson's rehabilitation after his spectacular, self-inflicted fall from grace. Gibson – once one of Tinseltown's most beloved commercially and critically acclaimed artists before anti-Semitic tirades, leaked tapes of racist and misogynistic abuse, and domestic violence accusations – has officially been welcomed back to the fold. So how and why did Hollywood decide to once again embrace one of their disgraced, exiled own? Is there a timeline to forgive in an industry that is notoriously quick to judge? Like the rest of us regular folk, is there any reason why movie stars, if sincerely repentant, should not be allowed second chances? But if so, how does one come back from controversial mistakes? LIE LOW AND WAIT For Gibson, it would appear that all that was necessary was to lie low for a while and stay out of the tabloids before deploying his proven film-making skills to deliver a movie that the Academy could not ignore. The engrossing and emotional Hacksaw Ridge is a perfect ticket back into the hearts of Gibson's Hollywood peers. But that in turn begs the question: should we separate the art from the controversial artist? Should radio stations stop playing the music of glam rock legend Gary Glitter after his numerous convictions for pedophile offenses? Should opera houses not stage composer Richard Wagner's work because of his anti-Semitism? This is an all-too-familiar conflict in Hollywood. Judging a particular piece of work solely on its creative merits, apart from its creator's behavior, is trickier than it seems. And now, this age-old debate feels all the more unresolved in the wake of Casey Affleck's award season validation amid resurfaced allegations of misconduct. Seven years ago, Affleck was accused of sexual harassment by two women who had worked with him and then brother-in-law Joaquin Phoenix on the experimental mock documentary I'm Still Here. Both cases were settled out of court for an undisclosed amount in 2010 and Affleck has repeatedly denied the allegations. Immediately after the 41-year-old's Best Actor Oscar nomination was announced, criticism from actors, activists and commentators started streaming in. The most outspoken critic was Fresh Off The Boat star Constance Wu who led the charge of those questioning the judgment of the Academy, and the industry's disregard for sexual allegations and misconduct. Wu wrote in a lengthy tweet: "He's running for an award that honors a craft whose purpose is examining the dignity of the human experience & young women are deeply human." "Art isn't about humanity, right?" she tweeted. She believed that by nominating Affleck, Hollywood is reinforcing the "the industry's gross and often hidden mistreatment of women". Many people, both inside and outside the industry, applauded Wu for speaking out. Given Hollywood's history of high-profile controversies and scandals, perhaps this was seen as the moment to shine a fresh spotlight on an important discussion. Consider Roman Polanski, who went into exile after pleading guilty to having sex with a 13-year-old girl in 1977 and still won the Best Director trophy at the 2003 Oscars. Or how about Woody Allen, who was accused of - but never charged with - molesting the young daughter of his former partner Mia Farrow and is still an Oscar favorite and honoured. It seems that for the right kind of people, the Academy can be an incredibly forgiving group. NOT ALWAYS FORGIVING? But then look at one-time Oscar hopeful Nate Parker, whose film The Birth of a Nation was the talk and toast of the town at 2016's Sundance Film Festival. In the weeks leading up to its release last year, the film was overshadowed by reports of his 1999 rape trial (in which he was acquitted) that resurfaced. The previously lauded period drama about the slave rebellion did not receive a single Oscar nomination and has largely been ignored this awards season. Truth be told, this conundrum of figuring out how to separate art and artist may never be resolved. And the truth is, it may not be a black and white issue. Bad people sometimes create great art while good people sometimes produce mediocre art. My most honest response to this quandary is that whether we should forgive an artist is ultimately connected to the nature, severity and evidence of the crime, allegations or controversy. That is a subjective assessment, though – one person's forgivable misdemeanor will inevitably be seen by someone else as a heinous offense. But I do agree with Wu about how award season validation, even though there may not be a direct link to the artist's personal life, will inevitably be seen, in some way, as condoning bad behaviour. Which is why I think more could be done from within the Hollywood community. The pervasiveness of social media and the multitude of platforms allows anyone and everyone to share their opinion. Rather than hide their heads in the sand, as many do, the community should speak out when one of their own has strayed - not as a witch-hunt, and not to grab headlines, but to highlight acts which are seen as unacceptable. While they wouldn't speak with one voice, at least we'd get a sense of where the industry is drawing the lines on what it sees as forgivable behavior. Perhaps that is already happening. Affleck had, until the Screen Actors Guild (SAG) awards last week, been on an upward trajectory towards Oscar gold. He had been the odds-on favorite to win Best Actor at the Academy Awards for the past several weeks, thanks to wins at the New York and Chicago critics awards, the National Board of Review, the Critics' Choice awards and the Golden Globes, for his stirring performance in Manchester By The Sea. But his front-runner status hit a sudden snag at the SAGs when he lost the most predictive pre-Oscar award in the Best Male lead category (more than 80 per cent of past winners go on to win the Oscar) to Denzel Washington who won for his performance in Fences. The fact that the SAG awards are voted solely by actors – the artist in question's peers – perhaps says something. Loud enough for things to change?
