If it's good art it should endure through the ages, so by definition it needs to be able to shed its ties to its maker (notorious example Shakespeare - a dyed in the wool monarchist yet almost no one save for Shakespearean scholars takes this into consideration when enjoying the verses). Besides, not employing this separation quickly opens up the slippery slope of where to stop? Do you throw out the art if the artist once yelled at a cashier? Besides art is supposed to be the expression of all the best character traits, all the most profound insights, all the purest impulses of the person making it, the distilled bit of goodness lurking in even the vilest of people, so why throw away possibly the only redeeming act of someone's existence? Throw away the artist is what I'm saying but don't throw away the art. Strip it of its reactionary ideology, if any is present but salvage the beauty. Because if there's one thing always in short supply in this wretched human existence it's beauty.