Artistic Meanderings and Occasional Soul Searching

Sadly, this is what Spike Lee said in retort to Clint Eastwood.

This war of words has been played out in the media since Lee criticized Eastwood during a media interview for not including portrayals of black soldiers in his films, Flag of our Fathers, and Letters from Iwo Jima.

This article in The Guardian spells it out with links to more information. I’m too disheartened to read on right now: http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,2284542,00.html

Why was this dialogue done through the press? I’ve never delved very deeply into investigating about Spike Lee, though I think he’s a talented filmmaker, probably because of that time I read (I think around the time of Jungle Fever) that any white woman who went with a black man was a dog, or words to that effect.  Really turned me off (Who’s the racist, Spike?).  So he could have a film with that plot line, but in real life, not reel life, he was totally unaccepting of it. Lee has always liked being controversial I think.

So how is that these two educated men possess a fundamental lack in how to communicate … with each other?!

Is Lee so incendiary in nature he had to couch his concerns through the media? Is Eastwood such an old, stiff-necked Hollywood Gentry boob that he can’t hack some criticism, no matter how it arrives? It wasn’t like he was being personally insulted (as in made a bad film) but questioned as to his filmmaking motives. I always thought he was supposed to be a cool and level guy, but maybe he’s a lot more paternalistic and chauvinistic than I thought.

Pick up a phone, sit down in a room as two filmmakers and talk about it. Real artists ought to be able to do that.

The PC-ness (and apathy) of our country really disgusts me.

If this were a different time, people would be calling for blood for a racial insult like the one in the link to New York Magazine posted below. Shit, we have a President in office who should have been fucking impeached and we couldn’t even get that done.

My friend Fred said at a hangout we both frequent:

Oh, trust me…we’ll let you guys know exactly how horrible it is. If you ever wondered why black folks’ life expectancy is as low as it is and incidence of stress-related illness like high blood pressure is so commonplace, welcome to our world. You know what frosts me? When I react to something like this and I’m told not to be so “sensitive” about it. If I don’t say something, nothing changes. And if I don’t say something pointed, my homicidal side wants to filter to the surface.

When someone objected to my use of the term outrage, as though I’d get a brain aneurysm by virtue of expressing any negativity to this, I sent them the above quote. Just to clarify. And further I told them, it’s rather like Fred and other black Americans in this country being told to just “get over” that slavery thing.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/06/the_makers_of_a_racist_obama_t.html

Read the article, go to the sockobama.com website and make your own decision. Hopefully, it will be the right one and you’ll give that place a piece of your mind. Just click on “Contact Us.”

You’ll probably get a canned result like I did. Most disingenuous and smarmy was this comment in the reply email to me, and I’ll post my email and the response below:

I think our greatest surprise with all of this was because we all have fond memories about sock monkey’s as a toy, and that’s what we do here is make toys.

A toy for racists, you mean. Why didn’t the company include a free dart set while they were at it? As I said in my email, we’re not stupid, most of us here in America. We know, that with election of the first black President pretty inevitable, the hate mongering would start. But that doesn’t mean we have to take it. Thanks for reading and give it some thought. And blog it yourself.

My email (to customerservice@thesockobama.com and cc’d to quotes@customplushtoys.co - isn’t it interesting I got a reply from the manufacturer and not the wunderkinds behind it? I think so):

Dear Sir,

Keeping in mind that we live in a country that supports free enterprise, I am writing to to point out to you how utterly ridiculous it is that any reasonable, intelligent being on this earth or in the United States, would think this “product” is in any way in keeping with the tenets or philosophy our country was built on. It is beyond disgusting. This “thing” you are selling is unbelievably racist and incredibly hurtful to black Americans. And don’t you dare hide behind any premise such as, “We didn’t know,” or “We didn’t
realize,” when even a 10-year-old would know what your company is up to.

Do you even remember the words in the Constitution?: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Rest assured that millions of people get it. And they sure as Hell get you and will be talking, blogging, and emailing about your hateful Obama effigy.

Shame on you.

The Response:

Tonya;

Thank you for the email. I understand what you are saying.

We are a ‘Work For Hire’ custom manufacturer. We do not own and have not developed the property you are referring to so we cannot comment on the intent of the creators of that product.

We have contacted the creator of the product you are talking about for them to respond to the blog. I believe they have already. We would not have manufactured a toy that was intended to be derogatory. We do not have to answer to banks or shareholders, so profit is not our absolute bottom line. I run a socially conscience company.

After hearing people’s reactions such as yours, I personally was really surprised. Our staff here talked about it after and nobody here had made that connection. It is sad really. I think our greatest surprise with all of
this was because we all have fond memories about sock monkey’s as a toy, and that’s what we do here is make toys.

We get asked to make all sorts of products. We are a Canadian company and we do refuse orders at times based on content. We do review projects to make sure they are safe, achievable, and are not offensive. I fully appreciate what people are saying about this toy, but it did not occur to us that at all that it would be seen like that.

Thanks again for the email.

Rob Bishop

Binkley Custom Products
www.CustomPlushToys.com

1-800-304-6642

I have a couple of online friends I’ve known since 2001,

through four different movie forums; three of them mine in different locations. Noel and Chris - oh, the conversations we’ve had about film. They’re published, I’m not, but I’ve learned at their feet and maybe the unpublished part won’t be so true a whole lot longer.

We don’t always agree … Quel Surprise! It would be a very boring and prosaic world if that were the case. But when Noel and I agree, I’m always pleasantly surprised. We both like dark, out-of-the-ordinary movies like Cure, The Isle, Tim Burton’s Sweeney Todd, and two films that sprang from the original Exorcist. No, the original is not my favorite; in fact, I find only parts of it tolerable as an adult. Religious mumbo-jumbo has never been something that’s interested me much. But when it’s turned on its ear, when evil is explored in new and different ways, then yes, my ears perk up.

Take Exorcist 2: The Heretic. There are images of such stunning and weird beauty (as there always are in Boorman’s films, to varying degrees), combined with special effects that can overwhelm your senses, like the swarms of locusts, I almost felt transported to another plane of existence, or another planet. I know that Noel pretty much felt the same way. We both were impressed by Boorman’s use of Richard Burton as Father Lamont, a burned-out, almost wreck; a shell of the priest he once was, questioning, even rejecting his faith. Burton, even in the shape he was in reality at that time, brilliantly reflected his own fall from superstardom, perhaps even his own realization that his faith in his own profession was broken, within the parameters of his role. The only quibble I have with anything in the film is the very ending, which really does stretch my acceptance of artistic license and believability far, far beyond the breaking point. Ludicrous really - I could be reading things wrong at that point, but I don’t think subsequent viewings would improve my viewpoint. I had written a full review about my feelings on the film at one point in the past, now lost. In fact, I had conjoined them with Noel’s. He did have this to say about it, which I found through a Google search:

Then there’s the film-making. Which is gorgeous. Which (some of it, anyway) is inspired by the flying sequences in Murnau’s underrated “Faust,” only in gloriously amber color, as if Boorman smeared honey on his lenses.

The film is a great something–sometimes I think a monumental sick joke on religion, sometimes I think a fantastic film-making experiment that you shouldn’t (for the sake of your sanity) take too seriously. It’s Boorman turning the theological bull Blatty (appropriate name, I think) spouted in the original picture into something that resembles science fiction–a scientifically workable theory on the nature of evil, no less.

That’s Noel. He always cuts through the bullshit.

This is the original theatrical trailer of Heretic.  A warning — this is best viewed with your speakers turned to OFF.  Very, very odd, but I think the visuals will be interesting:

We also both highly appreciated the Paul Schrader-directed Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist. Here’s part of what I posted from an article about Schrader’s firing from the film:

“There were huge fights between Paul, who is more artistic, and the company, and earlier this week Paul was fired. They are planning on hiring a new director to reshoot some scenes.”

Reshoot some scenes? Try refilming most of the movie with a new director (Renny Harlin) and replacing three of the main cast members. I wrote this in 2004 after seeing the Harlin version. It would take a few years before Schrader’s film would be released:

There are so many factors on so many levels that would explain its badness but it’s really not even worth it. It’s a gorefest that features a fine actor (Stellan Skarsgard) who tries his best. The only thing atmospheric or bringing a hint of evil into the mix are Mr./Father Merrin’s flashbacks to WWII, where he was forced (or was he, did he have a choice) to commit a terrible act. Merrin’s crisis of faith, the interesting part, is totally overshadowed by Harlin’s heavy-handed direction. I won’t say don’t see it but there’s a totally gratuitous scene that involves the horrible death of a child, so if you’re at all sensitive to things like that, avert your eyes. I can only hope that Paul Schrader’s version sees the light of day.

Schrader’s version, on the other hand, has deep and dark psychological overtones that have to do with a horrible choice Father Merrin is forced to make by Nazis (this opens the film) and it is one of the most chilling depictions of evil ever put on film. This scene has terrible reverberations later in the film. Merrin loses his faith but through the course of the film, regains it. How he gets there is fascinating. Even with some gore (and unfortunately some special effects lacking in quality due to funding on the film), the film is almost old-fashioned in its mostly quiet and reflective tone.

Noel wrote this:

I love my funny, creative, deep, and intelligent movie friends. Noel and I disagree the most which is why I “picked on” him in this blog.

Read more of Noel’s reviews and thoughts on film (and check out his book about film) at:

http://criticafterdark.blogspot.com/

Does that make him a bad guy?

Well. It depends on the reasons behind his decision. Bale has apparently signed his soul over to Director McG (who gave us the deep and meaningful Charlie’s Angels movies) to do three, that’s (3), Tres, Drei, Trois, Tatu, Terminator movies. He is starring as John Connor, who I think is more interesting as a kid.

Really, I’m done. I’m very happy with The Sarah Connor Chronicles. I liked the journey of the mother in the first film, the second with the boy and now the young man in the television series. I don’t need to know what happens to everyone, every facet of the Machine Wars. I just don’t. What more can be said? Do I want to see Schwarzenegger as a geriatric Terminator, much like Harrison Ford doing Indy 18 years later? Please, no.

An acquaintance says Bale is doing this to set himself up to not care about getting paid to do films he really wants to do. Which is why I say sell out. And since Bale will do THREE of these high-tech, glossy, unimaginative pieces of crap, when will he have time to do anything else?

Sure, he did Batman Begins. It was a brilliant take on the Batman mystique. Now we have The Dark Knight coming out. These films did not set up Bale financially for life already?

I know intellectually actors sell out all the time. They hawk products in other countries and earn millions. Even Olivier did Polaroid commercials. However, that was far less sell-out than an older, distinguished actor who never made a lot of money in his career. He started a new life after age 50, became ill, and had three children and a wife to care for. No, I don’t begrudge Olivier anything he did, including some of his crappier film work. He did it for survival and to leave something for his family.

Pray tell, what is Bale’s excuse? As quoted by Charlie Sheen’s character to Michael Douglas’ in Wall Street, “How many boats to waterski behind do you need? When is it enough?”

Yeah, I’m disillusioned, but sanguine enough to understand it’s the game of our age.

Finally saw Atonement

What was all the fuss about?  I think the film had much more weight at the beginning and end than some of the middle sections, which were sort of ho-hum.  The film’s opening is pretty scary; a whodunit balanced between manners, intellect, and passion, riding on the shoulders of a 13-year-old know it all buttinsky.  Oddly, since we didn’t see what happened in prison for Robbie after the false accusation and have to imagine it, his suffering isn’t that terribly palpable. You understand it intellectually, but not necessarily very viscerally in an emotional way.

One of my favorite parts of the first act was Robbie trying to apologize to Cecelia by typing her a note, while listening to La Boheme. I had read a section of the book awhile back and got spoiled as to what he wrote in his note, and was surprised to see that the “offensive” two sentences were not written in anger as I thought they were.   Cunt in this case (a word I loathe) actually makes sense in this context.  Robbie’s amusement at having written something so sexually crude in the moment made a lot of sense within the framework of the attraction and anger they were both experiencing but couldn’t find a way to express. Yet.

I was very moved by Briony at 18 finally learning how to care for another human being that didn’t involve selfishness on her part. And then Vanessa Redgrave bringing everything full circle as the elderly Briony. Yes, tears from me. But more from the humanity that grew from a pretty tortured woman’s life, searching for a way to express itself. Karma, it never fails. It’s a bittersweet tale to be sure but not the horribly tragic one people raved about. At least, I don’t see it. But to a certain extent very much enjoyed it, despite it being rather pedestrian next to films that have similar elements.

I remember Du’a Khalil Aswad

A beautiful young woman, aged 17

Murdered in Kurdistan, Iraq

by relatives including her uncle,

And others

While hundreds watched

And cheered

And did nothing

She never got to fully live her life

Taken from this world too soon

Du’a, I will remember you the rest of my life

Rest in peace now

On May 20, 2007, Joss Whedon wrote a stunning essay about Du’a Khalil’s murder in Kurdistan, violence against women depicted on film, and violence against women in general. Because of this impassioned plea for sanity in the world, I started doing more, a little at a time. I joined Equality Now awhile back and contribute “X” dollars a month to their causes. I write blogs once in awhile on subjects that are meaningful to me and try to be more aware and compassionate about what is happening to people, every single day.

http://whedonesque.com/comments/13271

I received the email below last Friday morning, the 28th. Below the text of the email are three links; one is to a gathering honoring Du’a Khalil and other women who were victims of honor killings (If you live in London or Paris …) , as well as what you personally can do to honor Du’a on April 7th, 2008, the anniversary of her murder. Last is a link to a discussion blog:

From The International Campaign Against Honour Killings

Hello,

Date: Saturday 12 April, 2008
Time: 5.00-9:00pm
Address: University of London Union (ULU)
Room 3D, Malet Street London WC1E 7HY
Closest underground: Russell Square

A year after the world was stunned by images of a 17 year old girl being stoned to death in Iraqi Kurdistan; an international panel will debate the rise of honour killings, violence against women, gender apartheid and political Islam in Kurdistan/Iraq and the Middle East.

The high profile speakers are women’s rights activists, academics and experts from Kurdistan, Iraq, Iran, Sweden, New Zealand, and Britain and include:

* Dr Sandra Phelps: Head of Sociology Department, Kurdistan University
* Houzan Mahmoud: representative of Organisation Women’s Freedom in
Iraq
* Heather Harvey: head of women’s campaign-Amnesty International in
UK
* Maryam Namazie: Spokesperson of Equal Rights Now
* Maria Hagberg: Cofounder of Network against Honour Killings in Sweden
* Azar Majedi: Chair of Organisation for Women’s Liberation in Iran
* Chair: Maria Exall, Communication Workers’ Union National Executive in
UK

For more information and to confirm please contact the organiser:
Houzan Mahmoud: houzan2007@yahoo.com Tel: 07534264481
Organisation of Women’s Freedom in Iraq- Abroad representative

I then received another email from the organization above. There will also be a gathering in Paris on the anniversary of Du’a Khalil’s death:

Come to commemorate this day with us, at a conference, Monday April 7th, from 6-7 pm, at the Buddhachannel/ParisTVProd, at 206 rue Lafayette in Paris 10th Arrondissemont.

We will address international laws relating to crimes (murders) of honor, then a presentation will take place by Mr. Camille Boudjak, author of the book « Un totalitarisme contre les femmes, Répercussions des crimes et du système de « l’honneur familial » sur les conditions de vie des femmes au Moyen Orient » (A Totalitarianism against women, reprecussions of these murders and the system of the « Family Honor » on the conditions of life of the women in the middle east.) We will speak with you also of our actions in favor of the defense of the fundamental rights of all women, in particular against the honor crimes(murders), then we will present to you a clip in memory of all the women assassinated in the name of a morbid, oppressive, and retrogressive honor code.

Please confirm your presence by email @ abysse.gipf@gmail.com

Conference is organized by the ONG GIPF (international group for women’s voices) and ICAHK (International campaign against the Honor crimes)”

ALSO:

http://www.ikwro.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=282&Itemid=26

Conference in San Francisco: Violence Against Women, Honor Killings

http://www.equalityiniraq.com/english/2007/1Amnesty_Honor_Killing.pdf

LASTLY, BUT CERTAINLY NOT LEASTLY:

Quoter Gal, a member of Whedonesque.com started a blog last year for us to talk about all of this. Take a look if you have time:

http://iamduakhalil.blogspot.com/

I love the TCM channel on cable. Last weeked I saw All About Eve which holds up marvelously thanks to a great script.

As my friend Ted said: Yes, it does work wonderfully. I like A Letter to Three Wives just as much. The Ghost and Mrs. Muir is a fine sentimental comedy, and People Will Talk, like Marnie, is having its rep rehabilitated. It’s not often you get that kind of dialogue by an American writer in an American film. Most writers of the Golden Age were more of the clipped Ben Hecht/Preston Sturges American wisecracking school. IMDB says Mankiewicz’s idol was Lubitsch, and you can see that Mank blends the continental with wisecrack. That allowed him to be the screen’s Shaw, and not just another second rate issue of the George S. Kaufman progeny.

Have you ever checked out TCM’s website? You can order videos and film books directly from them. Every month I try to remember to enter their book giveaway contest:

http://www.tcm.com/bookcorner/index/?cid=193149

Yesterday I saw a Kirk Douglas film (directed by Vincente Minnelli, who was so versatile) I haven’t seen in ages, The Bad and the Beautiful, an expose of how Hollywood producers and directors (and different kinds) get ahead at the expense of actors and writers. Kirk Douglas is amazing in the scene where he viciously rejects Lana Turner’s love, the only time he exposes his character’s insecurities. You might have thought the character Dawn on Buffy was the only one to have an emotional breakdown, shrieking, “Get out, get out, get OUT!!!!!” Not so. Douglas was the first. You could have knocked me over. Then Lana Turner (who I never thought of as a great actress) practically outdoes him as she disintegrates driving away from that humiliation. Wow.

And in tribute to Buffy and its panel at the Paley Center in Los Angeles a few days ago, I’ll be watching the episode The Body today from my Chosen Collection, arguably the, if not one of the best episodes of the entire series.

Originally posted at MySpace, May 20, 2007:

Like other of my friends at Whedonesque and MySpace, I’m going to write a short note to you, asking that you read a message by a very special person that was posted at Whedonesque last night.  That person is Joss Whedon.   He cares so much, he does so much, he thinks about this issue so much that I fear for his health.  I have spent last night and much of today reading through, and contributing to, the more than 200 posts (note: as of 3/9/08 over 400)  from folks trying to understand through sharing their own experiences of violence and misogyny, their thoughts and feelings about womens’ rights, and the inequality that exists for both genders, all sexual orientation, all ages.

Joss’ post is a prayer to the universe, a plea for overcoming insanity.  When I first read it, my heart felt like it would burst through my chest.  We can never be reminded enough to try, at least try to make a difference, so that equality becomes a reality across all borders, all nations, all cultures.

Whedonesque - Read the reactions and discussion.

Joss’ post:

Let’s Watch A Girl Get Beaten To Death. This is not my blog, but I don’t have a blog, or a space, and I’d like to be heard for a bit.

Last month seventeen year old Dua Khalil was pulled into a crowd of young men, some of them (the instigators) family, who then kicked and stoned her to death. This is an example of the breath-taking oxymoron “honor killing”, in which a family member (almost always female) is murdered for some religious or ethical transgression. Dua Khalil, who was of the Yazidi faith, had been seen in the company of a Sunni Muslim, and possibly suspected of having married him or converted. That she was torturously murdered for this is not, in fact, a particularly uncommon story. But now you can watch the action up close on CNN. Because as the girl was on the ground trying to get up, her face nothing but red, the few in the group of more than twenty men who were not busy kicking her and hurling stones at her were filming the event with their camera-phones.

There were security officers standing outside the area doing nothing, but the footage of the murder was taken – by more than one phone – from the front row. Which means whoever shot it did so not to record the horror of the event, but to commemorate it. To share it. Because it was cool.

I could start a rant about the level to which we have become desensitized to violence, about the evils of the voyeuristic digital world in which everything is shown and everything is game, but honestly, it’s been said. And I certainly have no jingoistic cultural agenda. I like to think that in America this would be considered unbearably appalling, that Kitty Genovese is still remembered, that we are more evolved. But coincidentally, right before I stumbled on this vid I watched the trailer for “Captivity”.

A few of you may know that I took public exception to the billboard campaign for this film, which showed a concise narrative of the kidnapping, torture and murder of a sexy young woman. I wanted to see if the film was perhaps more substantial (especially given the fact that it was directed by “The Killing Fields” Roland Joffe) than the exploitive ad campaign had painted it. The trailer resembles nothing so much as the CNN story on Dua Khalil. Pretty much all you learn is that Elisha Cuthbert is beautiful, then kidnapped, inventively, repeatedly and horrifically tortured, and that the first thing she screams is “I’m sorry”.

“I’m sorry.”

What is wrong with women?

I mean wrong. Physically. Spiritually. Something unnatural, something destructive, something that needs to be corrected.

How did more than half the people in the world come out incorrectly? I have spent a good part of my life trying to do that math, and I’m no closer to a viable equation. And I have yet to find a culture that doesn’t buy into it. Women’s inferiority – in fact, their malevolence — is as ingrained in American popular culture as it is anywhere they’re sporting burkhas. I find it in movies, I hear it in the jokes of colleagues, I see it plastered on billboards, and not just the ones for horror movies. Women are weak. Women are manipulative. Women are somehow morally unfinished. (Objectification: another tangential rant avoided.) And the logical extension of this line of thinking is that women are, at the very least, expendable.

I try to think how we got here. The theory I developed in college (shared by many I’m sure) is one I have yet to beat: Womb Envy. Biology: women are generally smaller and weaker than men. But they’re also much tougher. Put simply, men are strong enough to overpower a woman and propagate. Women are tough enough to have and nurture children, with or without the aid of a man. Oh, and they’ve also got the equipment to do that, to be part of the life cycle, to create and bond in a way no man ever really will. Somewhere a long time ago a bunch of men got together and said, “If all we do is hunt and gather, let’s make hunting and gathering the awesomest achievement, and let’s make childbirth kinda weak and shameful.” It’s a rather silly simplification, but I believe on a mass, unconscious level, it’s entirely true. How else to explain the fact that cultures who would die to eradicate each other have always agreed on one issue? That every popular religion puts restrictions on women’s behavior that are practically untenable? That the act of being a free, attractive, self-assertive woman is punishable by torture and death? In the case of this upcoming torture-porn, fictional. In the case of Dua Khalil, mundanely, unthinkably real. And both available for your viewing pleasure.

It’s safe to say that I’ve snapped. That something broke, like one of those robots you can conquer with a logical conundrum. All my life I’ve looked at this faulty equation, trying to understand, and I’ve shorted out. I don’t pretend to be a great guy; I know really really well about objectification, trust me. And I’m not for a second going down the “women are saints” route – that just leads to more stone-throwing (and occasional Joan-burning). I just think there is the staggering imbalance in the world that we all just take for granted. If we were all told the sky was evil, or at best a little embarrassing, and we ought not look at it, wouldn’t that tradition eventually fall apart? (I was going to use ‘trees’ as my example, but at the rate we’re getting rid of them I’m pretty sure we really do think they’re evil. See how all rants become one?)

Now those of you who frequent this site are, in my wildly biased opinion, fairly evolved. You may hear nothing new here. You may be way ahead of me. But I can’t contain my despair, for Dua Khalil, for humanity, for the world we’re shaping. Those of you who have followed the link I set up know that it doesn’t bring you to a video of a murder. It brings you to a place of sanity, of people who have never stopped asking the question of what is wrong with this world and have set about trying to change the answer. Because it’s no longer enough to be a decent person. It’s no longer enough to shake our heads and make concerned grimaces at the news. True enlightened activism is the only thing that can save humanity from itself. I’ve always had a bent towards apocalyptic fiction, and I’m beginning to understand why. I look and I see the earth in flames. Her face was nothing but red.

All I ask is this: Do something. Try something. Speaking out, showing up, writing a letter, a check, a strongly worded e-mail. Pick a cause – there are few unworthy ones. And nudge yourself past the brink of tacit support to action. Once a month, once a year, or just once. If you can’t think of what to do, there is this handy link. Even just learning enough about a subject so you can speak against an opponent eloquently makes you an unusual personage. Start with that. Any one of you would have cried out, would have intervened, had you been in that crowd in Bashiqa. Well thanks to digital technology, you’re all in it now.

I have never had any faith in humanity. But I will give us props on this: if we can evolve, invent and theorize our way into the technologically magical, culturally diverse and artistically magnificent race we are and still get people to buy the idiotic idea that half of us are inferior, we’re pretty amazing. Let our next sleight of hand be to make that myth disappear.

The sky isn’t evil. Try looking up.

Originally posted at MySpace, June 11, 2007:

Are you a big book reader? A few months ago out of a conversation about eccentric characters in Southern films like Steel Magnolias, I wrote some commentary at my movie forum in the thread started by my friend Noel, called The Penis Mightier Than The Sword.

As I age, I become more tolerant and INtolerant of myself, the world, society, and how people treat each other. Why, just this last Friday I had a couple of people tell me and some others that Paris Hilton is not worth caring about as a human being by saying in so many words, “Here is what you ought to be caring about.” That is disturbing on many levels. No one has the right to say that to me. It is arrogant and insulting.

So, even before this discussion some time back, some of the words from Gone With The Wind have been rattling around in my head, probably because of the whole Imus situation. I don’t mean to offend anyone either with my opinion. I don’t judge those who think GWTW was a good novel or movie. The particular phrase that I’ve been remembering is “Lawsy, Miss Scarlett, I don’t know nuthin’ ’bout birthin’ no babies,” and the particular scene this discussion brought up is Rhett overpowering Scarlett, carrying her up the stairs and ravishing her in the bedroom. I stop short of saying rape because the narrative in the novel doesn’t go there, but it does imply very strongly that Scarlett could only find sexual pleasure in being used harshly. Which I find utter crap and it cuts a little too closely to the party line I’ve heard far too often, that women like it rough, that women live to be overpowered and “taken” by men.

The following is the relevant section:

You turned me out on the town while you chased him. By God, this is one night when there are only going to be two in my bed.”

He was muttering things she did not hear, his lips were evoking feelings never felt before. She was darkness and he was darkness and there had never been anything before this time, only darkness and his lips upon her. She tried to speak and his mouth was over hers again. Suddenly she had a wild thrill such as she had never known; joy, fear, madness, excitement, surrender to arms that were too strong, lips too bruising, fate that moved too fast. For the first time in her life she had met someone, something stronger than she, someone she could neither bully nor break, someone who was bullying and breaking her. Somehow, her arms were around his neck and her lips trembling beneath his and they were going up, up into the darkness again, a darkness that was soft and swirling and all enveloping.

I’ll admit that when I was young and hadn’t had sex yet, I found this passage exciting, yet confusing. I didn’t like the part about being bullied and broken but the other imagery was highly sexual because we know what it means. The character had an orgasm for the first time in her life. But the point of a truly loving relationship is not to come, but to care about the other person’s pleasure more than your own, ensuring that orgasm is more possible. So this book really sent me mixed messages about a married relationship.

Keeping in mind the time period in which the novel was written, the depiction of slaves and the way they talked and were treated is still highly disturbing. The O’Haras and the Wilkses might be a glorified bunch, but I don’t care how nicely they treated their slaves, it’s still slavery isn’t it? And having a 17-inch waist as the perfection of womanhood? And not eating much to preserve that waist? And how about Scarlett herself. Is she someone to look up to or was she just another female opportunist who expediently bounced from man to man? You might think she displayed the strength of Buffy in her “As God is my witness, I’m never going to be hungry again,” speech after all her travails up to that point, but her ability to get through tough situations was hardly selfless as Buffy often was in helping others.

In my opinion, GWTW is a potboiler novel full of cliched Southern ideals and thinking about the old South, where the “darkies” are all either smiling and pleasant like Mammy, or shiftless and lazy like Prissy, there to serve as background stereotypical figures to the white folk.

It’s amazing how much a person’s viewpoint can change over the years. I don’t think I was ever truly comfortable as an adult watching the movie, I admittedly was more into the actors like Vivien Leigh et al and the filmmaking process itself. The only scene that I truly love in the whole film is when Ashley comes back from the war and at first Melanie thinks it’s a beggar from far off, coming up the roadway to ask for food:

She stopped so suddenly that Scarlett turned to look at her. Melanie’s thin hand was at her throat, clutching it as if it was torn with pain, and Scarlett could see the veins beneath the white skin throbbing swiftly. Her face went whiter and her brown eyes dilated enormously.

“After all, he’s HER husband, ain’t he?” Will asked calmly and, looking down at him in a confusion of joy and impotent fury, Scarlett saw in the quiet depths of his eyes understanding and pity.

In the movie it was Mammy who stopped Scarlett, and it was the only time the two interacted as equals.

I was also thinking bout comparing the misogyny of the Scarlett/Rhett sex scene in the book (the movie give you nada because of the times) to another book that fascinated me as a teenager. I remember my best friend’s mom talking about a certain page number in The Godfather. Of course, I didn’t understand it at the time, but when I read it later … oh, what that did to me as an impressionable youth in search of sexual materials because my parents never explained nothin’ about nothin’.

But what was titillating then, is of course, ridiculous now, this notion that only a man with a big penis can satisfy a woman, and all these women in Sonny Corleone’s purview were lining up to get some. Well, not that Puzo didn’t later write more effective novels about the Mafia, but that’s another example of a pot boiler, par excellence.

Chalk it right up there with all the Harold Robbins, Henry Miller, and Happy Hooker books I read.