I've been trying to understand how and why anyone would defend the rapist of a child. Ann Althouse wonders if they're all pedophiles on that bus. Green Room blogger DAH sees it as an instance of liberal projection. I'm not at all willing to go that far, though Polanski himself, in his own words, saw, or wished to see, his personal depravity as one shared by all. (Language and content warning.)
But the fact remains that members of the "film community" (and others) are rushing to child-rapist Polanski's defense. Ignoramus Whoopi Goldberg said it wasn't "rape-rape," ya know? (Yes, it was. Get the ugly facts here.) Others imply/pretend that the girl was almost of age for consensual sex (not by a long shot, if that were even relevant, which it isn't); that it was her own or her mother's fault, etc. The bottom line is this: When child-rape is committed by a member of the entertainment elite, it's excusable. Or even necessary. You know these artsy types; their muses can make odd demands.
Ed Driscoll is compiling commentary and keeping track of the ever-growing list of child-rapist supporters. They're complaining that the arrest of child-rapist Polanski might (cue hand-wringing) stifle artistic expression. (Can they hear themselves?) Mr. Driscoll remarks:
Yes! It could mark the slippery slope back to the horrible days of the Hays Office — that neanderthal period when Hollywood made its best movies.Thereby branding himself as a hopeless neanderthal, unable to appreciate the gifts bestowed on the world by the Société des Auteurs et Compositeurs Dramatiques.
Back to the question of how child-rape has become acceptable in some circles, cultural trends that may help us understand this descent:
The death, or murder, of innocence, especially that of girls. Respecting the innocence of children requires a moral line to be drawn. The existence of that line declares that there's a limit to what is sexually acceptable. Hollywood despises innocence and drives culture, helping to blur or move the line.
Celebrity worship. Our culture is sick with it and it demands its sacrifices.
Movie addiction. There are people who can't go 24 hours without a movie. Parents are in constant search mode for 'acceptable' (a.k.a. not completely vile) films for their kids to watch. Our appetite is insatiable. Never mind that 90% of what's produced is worthless. Is anyone out there willing to say no to Hollywood?
The ends justify the means. If child-rape is grist for this man's creative mill, so be it. Great men have a right to devour and destroy others.
Related:
HuffPo goes all in to defend Polanski, readers revolt
Naming names: The "Free Roman Polanski" petition
Rape apologists: Roman Polanski's rape of a child not that bad
More on child-rape chic
Much more at Memeorandum
*Update:
Say, maybe OJ should give his agent a call . . .
Linked by Michelle Malkin (buzzworthy)
Most recent posts here.
This has always been a problem that has plagued all forms of art. The innocence of the young has always drawn interest from artists, but, it seems to me, it has always been reigned in by the society up until the modern age. Many have crossed the lines in the past, but they've either been shunned or prosecuted. Those periods in history when they haven't, have been times of debauchery and decline. Could this be one explanation?
ReplyDeleteAs a composer, writer, and musician, I must tell you that I am ashamed of my fellow artists—ashamed, but, sadly, not surprised. Up until the 19th Century, artists were very rarely allowed to sit at the same table with people of good reputation. There was a reason for that