Berys Gaut has recently defended a theory according to which a moral defect of a work of art represents an aesthetic defect of the work itself. This theory, called ethicism, has been criticized by Matthew Kieran, who argued that, on the contrary, in certain cases moral defects can increase the artistic value of artworks. In this essay I clarify the main points of the debate and claim that Gaut's defense of his theory is not convincing. (Contains 29 notes.)