Roman Polanski

[planetqueen]

I thought this was a fascinating article about the over simplification of moralising.

"It is the complication that we need. People have become desperate to reduce everything, including each other, to mindless categories of good and bad, as if the world can be divided into Facebook likes and dislikes"


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/29/roman-polanski-samantha-geimer?commentpage=1

 

[badbabysitter]

" i also like fucking 14 year olds"

 

[planetqueen]

" i also like fucking 14 year olds"

Did you read the article? I didn't get that Victoria Cohen was saying that.

 

[HoHoBomb]

Yummmy

 

[planetqueen]

I have very strong feelings about Polanski - what he did was unforgiveable.

The article was interesting in addressing how we think about things, rather than saying it was fine what he did. That isn't the point at all!

 

[eyer]

What a bunch of relative bullcrap...

 

[Phelia]

Really interesting read!

I think it's spot on, but I find the reference to Facebook interesting. I see it mentioned a lot in tandem with Twitter as representative of a miasmic "social media" that forces us to simplify the truth and texture out of our news stories. But is this a new phenomenon? Surely we've been casting heroes and villains since before 2004. Was Roman Polanski given "nuanced" coverage at the time of the initial incident?

I also thought the bit about the therapist on Oprah being patronizing was of note. Granted, therapists who appear on Oprah and hypothesize about people they've never met are not exactly the types of people I listen to anyway, but I think that the idea of "victim blaming" has become knee-jerk at the expense of its effectiveness. I think there's a world of difference between acknowledging putting yourself in a dangerous situation and accepting partial blame for your attack. It's a really, really grey area though, and yes, nuanced. Needs to be something we can examine openly, honestly, thoughtfully, and safely, and that article is a great starting point.

Thank you for posting

 

[neci]

we live in a world where everyone has a story. some are violent and horrific, some filled with the beauty of naivety. that does not excuse our actions. it does not excuse the rape of innocence. i loved the pianist. there is truth in morbid beauty. layering of pain and sound into a song which makes your heart soar. we oversimplify, trying to allow ourselves the ease of black and white in a grey world. personal responsibility. truth. if i could tell the girl anything, it would be that it is not her fault for trusting a man she had permission to trust.

 

[dolf]

the required premeditation paints it close enough to black to be black. it was not a date night fumble that went too far, it was not a foolish man imagining that 'nice' girls say no when they mean yes. it is patronising to me to tell me that i'm making an immature, kneejerk, black & white judgement.

 

[Phelia]

Goodness gracious. It's a great article an a serious, interesting topic. Would it kill you people not to be vapid morons for like, five minutes?

ETA: Clearly talking about neci and dolf here. Silly bints.

 

[planetqueen]

Really interesting read!

I think it's spot on, but I find the reference to Facebook interesting. I see it mentioned a lot in tandem with Twitter as representative of a miasmic "social media" that forces us to simplify the truth and texture out of our news stories. But is this a new phenomenon? Surely we've been casting heroes and villains since before 2004. Was Roman Polanski given "nuanced" coverage at the time of the initial incident?

I also thought the bit about the therapist on Oprah being patronizing was of note. Granted, therapists who appear on Oprah and hypothesize about people they've never met are not exactly the types of people I listen to anyway, but I think that the idea of "victim blaming" has become knee-jerk at the expense of its effectiveness. I think there's a world of difference between acknowledging putting yourself in a dangerous situation and accepting partial blame for your attack. It's a really, really grey area though, and yes, nuanced. Needs to be something we can examine openly, honestly, thoughtfully, and safely, and that article is a great starting point.

Thank you for posting

I thought it was interesting too. I didn't agree with everything she said, but I liked that it made me think.

Am not sure she could have written it if she was a man.

 

[Phelia]

the required premeditation paints it close enough to black to be black. it was not a date night fumble that went too far, it was not a foolish man imagining that 'nice' girls say no when they mean yes. it is patronising to me to tell me that i'm making an immature, kneejerk, black & white judgement.

I found the author was actually over-complicating. What he did was absolutely wrong and inexcusable, and he should have been punished within the criminal justice system. That's it. She polluted it with her own personal justice (wanting to be violent towards him) and resultant guilt.

However, I also think her article hit some truths worth taking a look at.

 

[planetqueen]

we live in a world where everyone has a story. some are violent and horrific, some filled with the beauty of naivety. that does not excuse our actions. it does not excuse the rape of innocence. i loved the pianist. there is truth in morbid beauty. layering of pain and sound into a song which makes your heart soar. we oversimplify, trying to allow ourselves the ease of black and white in a grey world. personal responsibility. truth. if i could tell the girl anything, it would be that it is not her fault for trusting a man she had permission to trust.

And everything I am reading, and the job I am doing and the relationships I am having - all seem to point to reminding me of that all the time at the moment. To over simplify things is to not see things in all of life's complexity. However I might want to demonise a person for doing something (and I often do) it is never the whole of what something or someone is.

 

[neci]

I found the author was actually over-complicating. What he did was absolutely wrong and inexcusable, and he should have been punished within the criminal justice system. That's it. She polluted it with her own personal justice (wanting to be violent towards him) and resultant guilt.

However, I also think her article hit some truths worth taking a look at.

i think she was trying to filter and process the truths she was confronted with into her own language. as a result, she filters through facebook. that is a lot of our culture, sadly.

 

[planetqueen]

the required premeditation paints it close enough to black to be black. it was not a date night fumble that went too far, it was not a foolish man imagining that 'nice' girls say no when they mean yes. it is patronising to me to tell me that i'm making an immature, kneejerk, black & white judgement.

Interesting I didn't read it like that. I didn't get that she didn't think it was exactly what is was - anal rape of a child. The most horrendous of things to do.

I have always believed that he should be absolutely judged by what he did. The article didn't change my mind but it made me think about the grayness if you like. The complicating factors which make it impossible for us to only look at things from one angle.

I thought she used this example to explain this, to make me think about it differently, rather than excuse his behaviour. That is how I read it anyway.

 

[neci]

And everything I am reading, and the job I am doing and the relationships I am having - all seem to point to reminding me of that all the time at the moment. To over simplify things is to not see things in all of life's complexity. However I might want to demonise a person for doing something (and I often do) it is never the whole of what something or someone is.

just the tip of the iceberg.

to know someone inside out and not know them at all. my own fear of lost connection. we crave our angels and demons, the ones resting on shoulders being mine to worry about.

there is a beauty in simplification. to read past the use of simple words. opening new worlds of life and death.

 

[dolf]

I found the author was actually over-complicating. What he did was absolutely wrong and inexcusable, and he should have been punished within the criminal justice system. That's it. She polluted it with her own personal justice (wanting to be violent towards him) and resultant guilt.

However, I also think her article hit some truths worth taking a look at.

there is almost always a difference between what we have the urge to do and what is the right thing to do. the way we're dealing with wrong doers shouldn't compromise our own moral integrity. that's a very basic concept and the reason we have court cases instead of lynch mobs in civilised societies.

she strikes me as lacking in self awareness.

 

[dolf]

Interesting I didn't read it like that. I didn't get that she didn't think it was exactly what is was - anal rape of a child. The most horrendous of things to do.

I have always believed that he should be absolutely judged by what he did. The article didn't change my mind but it made me think about the grayness if you like. The complicating factors which make it impossible for us to only look at things from one angle.

I thought she used this example to explain this, to make me think about it differently, rather than excuse his behaviour. That is how I read it anyway.

with the premeditation, the obvious planning on his part? I think it does indeed cross the line from complicating factors to excuses. it is possible to pity a person their suffering whist still condemning them.

from his films we clearly see the man can empathise. he may be suffering but he is not impaired from understanding the consequences of actions such as his. he is obviously intelligent and sensitive... and selfish, and cruel. sometimes, despite there being many angles, there is only one angle to view an action from.

I don't think that, for any thinking person, the article raises any questions that haven't been raised before.

 

[dolf]

had she used a different crime as her example I might think she had a point rather than an issue.

 

[planetqueen]

just the tip of the iceberg.

to know someone inside out and not know them at all. my own fear of lost connection. we crave our angels and demons, the ones resting on shoulders being mine to worry about.

there is a beauty in simplification. to read past the use of simple words. opening new worlds of life and death.

exactly

I love how you write about things

 

[planetqueen]

with the premeditation, the obvious planning on his part? I think it does indeed cross the line from complicating factors to excuses. it is possible to pity a person their suffering whist still condemning them.

from his films we clearly see the man can empathise. he may be suffering but he is not impaired from understanding the consequences of actions such as his. he is obviously intelligent and sensitive... and selfish, and cruel. sometimes, despite there being many angles, there is only one angle to view an action from.

I don't think that, for any thinking person, the article raises any questions that haven't been raised before.

Well for me it obviously did. I don't think I have ever wanted to consider other angles - certainly not in relation to this. My anger and vitriol stopped me and whilst my view remains unchanged, the way I looked at it hasn't - It made me look at things a bit differently and for that reason, I thought the article interesting.

 

[eyer]

I did something wrong, I was stupid… To pose topless, and to drink and to take the [sleeping] pill.

This is the adult woman still punishing the 13-year old girl...

...because Polanski intentionally and forcibly raped her.

Polanski should still have whatever testicles he has left snipped-off with a pair of jaggedly dull scissors, and then be made to gag on them until he suffocates his friggin' self.

It is whatever tolerance is allowed - in any degree whatsoever - for such crimes against humanity that permits any woman to ever wrongly torment herself so sadly...

There can be ABSOLUTELY NO TOLERANCE for any rape - PERIOD...

...is that black enough for you gutless ones?

 

[Phelia]

I thought it was interesting too. I didn't agree with everything she said, but I liked that it made me think.

Am not sure she could have written it if she was a man.

Not about Roman Polanski, no. I think something similar could have been (and probably was) written about the Trayvon Martin case, though, by either gender (although race may have been a consideration). George Zimmerman was either a crazed, racist vigilante murderer or a stand-your-ground neighborhood hero. We will never know the reality for sure, but I imagine that it was quite far removed from either of those.

Apples and oranges, of course, but I see shared starting points for these conversations. Polanski also raises the question of good art by bad people, which is something I've been thinking about rather a lot lately. It's a thorny question.

i think she was trying to filter and process the truths she was confronted with into her own language. as a result, she filters through facebook. that is a lot of our culture, sadly.

Yes, very true. It's interesting to see how our screen-addiction is filtering into books and movies and television. I've heard it's hard to write around - no one wants to watch a movie about someone peering into a computer screen, but it's how we spend so much of our lives, now. I did get the sense that she was looking to throw in some relatable language and a presentist lens, but it's a theme I see a lot, that the internet/social media is diluting or muting or significantly altering our ability to form thoughts and opinions. Seems to happen with all new forms of communication, but most of it seems to be truer to communication than to the form.

there is almost always a difference between what we have the urge to do and what is the right thing to do. the way we're dealing with wrong doers shouldn't compromise our own moral integrity. that's a very basic concept and the reason we have court cases instead of lynch mobs in civilised societies.

she strikes me as lacking in self awareness.

Agreed, but I notice that in a lot of columnists. Sometimes the op-eds in the New York Times are just like...what? You're being paid quite a lot of money by one of the most respected publications in the world, and you think I want to read about how you think I should be a go-getter? Golf metaphors? WTF?? Give people a platform and they quickly forget how silly they are.

 

[neci]

This is the adult woman still punishing the 13-year old girl...

...because Polanski intentionally and forcibly raped her.

Polanski should still have whatever testicles he has left snipped-off with a pair of jaggedly dull scissors, and then be made to gag on them until he suffocates his friggin' self.

It is whatever tolerance is allowed - in any degree whatsoever - for such crimes against humanity that permits any woman to ever wrongly torment herself so sadly...

There can be ABSOLUTELY NO TOLERANCE for any rape - PERIOD...

...is that black enough for you gutless ones?

self punishment is a part of the cycle. to dream you could have had control. it is a normal part of the healing process. there is no shame in her truth the way she goes through it. i used to blame myself for wearing a swimsuit, when i was just a swimmer. i blamed myself by hiding my body. i blamed myself for everything. it gave me the illusion of control. to forgive myself for hating and hurting myself was harder than forgiving him.

 

[Super-Surprise]

Watch it.


http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1157705/?ref_=fn_al_tt_5