Weighing In: The Polanski Petition and the Semantic Divide
Right now, I’m supposed to be doing two things: 1.) Recovering from a heinous case of the flu, and 2.) Writing up my TIFF reviews. Instead, I’m caught up in the anger and confusion of the Polanski arrest and subsequent petition for his release.
It’s a horrible position to be in. To feel vindicated that he finally got what was coming, and yet also to see why the petition has merit. It’s awful to watch people get caught up in the mob mentality of baying for his blood and wanting to be a part of that, too.
For the record, I would like nothing more than to see Polanski strung up by his balls while a rabid skunk gnaws on his face. Rape is rape. Rape of a thirteen year old is rape. There’s none of this “rape-rape” distinction bollocks. Rape is rape is rape and should be punished as such. Have I said rape enough that you’re starting to get the picture? Or do you need the added bonus of drugging and sodomy? As if one violation weren’t enough.
The fact of the matter is that Polanski should have been arrested and put to work in the salt mines years ago. Without a canary. But that’s not what I’m seeing the backlash against. Well, not solely.
There’s a little matter of the petition.
Le cinéma soutient Roman Polanski / Petition for Roman Polanski
For some bizarre reason, the list of signatories is a large, practically incomprehensible block of text with no indication of exactly how many people have signed. That’s not the issue. The issue is that of the names on there, some of them are people many of us admire (Tilda Swinton, Pedro Almodovar, Alfonso Cuaron, Natalie Portman, just to name a few), some are people whose name we see on that list and think Well, of course he’d be there (Woody Allen, anyone?), and some of them are people who the North American-centric people haven’t heard of and would have ‘no problem never supporting again because they’re nobody Europeans’. (Paraphrased and not sourced because I got incensed and closed the window after reading that quote. Ass.)
I have seen in so many places people lashing out at the people who have dared to sign the petition: They support child rape! They’re no better than Polanski himself! They all must be pedophiles! They want to see your children raped! How can they support such a monster?!
How can we ever watch a movie with/by [X] again without knowing that he/she supports such a despicable pervert?
The answer is, simply, you don’t have to.
The petition is nothing to do with what Polanski did. I admit, I was shocked when I, having not read the petition itself, saw all those names of people I admire coming out in support of freeing Polanski. I felt nauseous thinking about all those movies I’d never be able to watch without a twitch at the back of my mind pointing out all the assholes on the screen.
Then I read the petition.
I have always said that anyone who turns to Hollywood and Celebrities for political or legal information and opinions are Dumbass Morons. If you want information, look it up your damn self and don’t rely on some pretty mouthpiece to tell you what to think, because if there’s one thing clear about the spotlight: it makes you dumb.
The petition is poorly phrased and, in places, completely misleading. It has information that should not be in a formal petition which skews the message into a bad place. It is, in short, a fairly terrible petition, semantically speaking.
The petition, when read without the overwhelming urge to flay Polanski and rub salt in his wounds, is not about Polanski at all. It’s about the arrest, not who or what the arrest was for. It is very simply, about the fact that filmmakers need to be able to go to film festivals to present their films without worrying about political backlash from any number of directions.
The fact that Polanski was the first filmmaker to be arrested in such a way is damning for the cause and presents a slippery slope for any other filmmaker who may be presenting a film with an undesirable view of his or her home country, political or religious factions, or any number of subjects or reasons.
If you replace “Roman Polanski” with “Salman Rushdie” a majority of people would be all over that petition like white on rice. He wrote a book, he fled the country. The only difference is that his life literally was in danger, and he didn’t have a poorly worded petition on his tail. (Also the lack of rape in his story.) My argument stands.
If Salman Rushdie had been arrested in a neutral country and extradited back to a place where he would face the death sentence, this petition would stand as is.
But, there are two things I’m seeing a lot of people get caught up on. First, is the second paragraph:
His arrest follows an American arrest warrant dating from 1978 against the filmmaker, in a case of morals.
Calling ‘rape’ a ‘case of morals’ is just plain stupid. Admittedly, this comes from a Western background where, ideally, rape is Just Not On. (The facts and statistics that point out that that this just isn’t true for anyone except women are cause for another post, which I am absolutely not qualified to write.) In what seems to be an effort to not make the petition about the fact that Polanski plead guilty to a rape charge, the writer of the petition has highlighted the fact.
Strike one.
Filmmakers, actors, producers and technicians – everyone involved in international filmmaking – want him to know that he has their support and friendship.
There is absolutely no cause for this to be in the petition. Given what the petition is actually about, the arrest and extradition from a neutral country, and not about the crime itself, then the support and friendship of the filmmakers, actors, producers and technicians – everyone involved in international filmmaking** is absolutely irrelevant.
Strike two.
Had this petition been launched with any case other than Polanski’s, it would have had the potential to unite the filmmakers of the world against improper arrests and the potential for them to be used as censorial acts.
Unfortunately, we got Polanski. And instead of being able to unite against potential censorship and the danger future filmmakers may find themselves in, we get to rage at Tilda Swinton for daring to put her name to a petition that doesn’t know it’s arse from a hole in the ground.
So, while I agree that Polanski should absolutely face justice and serve his time, I cannot condone the arrest under the circumstances. It’s a paradox of Schrödinger’s proportions. And that, of course, can only lead to an angry, brainsore mob.
**(So, technically, that includes me. Thanks for asking. DENIED. See: Nads & Rabid Skunk)