A beautiful thing
December 25, 2015 1:40 PM Subscribe
Beautiful man. I saw him speak two Septembers ago, and left thinking that I'd encountered one of the smartest and hardest-working men I'd ever met. I got the sense that he works hard at his thought processes themselves, which validated certain ideas I'd been tentatively having and encouraged me to pursue them further.
Though, as he encourages us to look at the donut and avoid plunging into the hole, I'm reminded uncomfortably that he signed the petition requesting that Roman Polanski be freed, which is the sort of thing that requires the sort of privilege by which you can overlook the actions of a child rapist. Given how frequently and sympathetically he has portrayed our culture's exploitation and abuse of women, I found this supremely disconcerting.
His profound understanding of the ways in which monsters and decent men are inseparably entwined tends sometimes too much towards avoiding justice, which I feel has to go hand-in-hand is mercy. He has had the luck not to be forcibly plunged into that hole. I don't feel my own comparable luck ought to mean that I, too, should avoid concerning myself with these things—knowing how fortunate I am to have such ready access to my donut makes me first and foremost concerned about the people whose lack of tasty treats can't be solved with the internal profundities of meditation alone.
posted by rorgy at 2:08 PM on December 25, 2015 [6 favorites]
Though, as he encourages us to look at the donut and avoid plunging into the hole, I'm reminded uncomfortably that he signed the petition requesting that Roman Polanski be freed, which is the sort of thing that requires the sort of privilege by which you can overlook the actions of a child rapist. Given how frequently and sympathetically he has portrayed our culture's exploitation and abuse of women, I found this supremely disconcerting.
His profound understanding of the ways in which monsters and decent men are inseparably entwined tends sometimes too much towards avoiding justice, which I feel has to go hand-in-hand is mercy. He has had the luck not to be forcibly plunged into that hole. I don't feel my own comparable luck ought to mean that I, too, should avoid concerning myself with these things—knowing how fortunate I am to have such ready access to my donut makes me first and foremost concerned about the people whose lack of tasty treats can't be solved with the internal profundities of meditation alone.
posted by rorgy at 2:08 PM on December 25, 2015 [6 favorites]
With that accent, the "hertz donut" joke makes a lot more sense.
posted by idiopath at 2:13 PM on December 25, 2015 [2 favorites]
posted by idiopath at 2:13 PM on December 25, 2015 [2 favorites]
Man, Lynch's devotion to TM just gets deeper and deeper.
posted by Nelson at 2:30 PM on December 25, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Nelson at 2:30 PM on December 25, 2015 [1 favorite]
Given how frequently and sympathetically he has portrayed our culture's exploitation and abuse of women, I found this supremely disconcerting.
For me, and, I believe, Lynch, they go hand in hand. His understanding allows his portrayal. His ability to forgive is anchored in his acceptance of the connectedness of all things.
One of my favorite writers, David Milch, once said, "I've never heard of a crime that I didn't think myself capable of committing." When I heard him say it, I was aghast and very conflicted. It did not make sense to me as I believed him to be the creator of the deepest characters I'd ever encountered in fiction and that claim is one of a monster. I could not reconcile them. But as I've grown older, suffered more, soared more, witnessed more, I've come to understand the quote and even embrace it.
Yes, Lynch signed that petition, but so did many of the greatest filmmakers alive, including a number of women and many people of color. You cannot wash it away with a wave of the "that's privilege" wand. Life is not black or white. It's black and white.
Many of us achieve greatness because we're driven to be great. Some of us achieve it by spinning against our drive. There can be value in those of us that fuck up, but it requires the participation of those who can forgive.
posted by You Should See the Other Guy at 6:21 PM on December 25, 2015 [3 favorites]
For me, and, I believe, Lynch, they go hand in hand. His understanding allows his portrayal. His ability to forgive is anchored in his acceptance of the connectedness of all things.
One of my favorite writers, David Milch, once said, "I've never heard of a crime that I didn't think myself capable of committing." When I heard him say it, I was aghast and very conflicted. It did not make sense to me as I believed him to be the creator of the deepest characters I'd ever encountered in fiction and that claim is one of a monster. I could not reconcile them. But as I've grown older, suffered more, soared more, witnessed more, I've come to understand the quote and even embrace it.
Yes, Lynch signed that petition, but so did many of the greatest filmmakers alive, including a number of women and many people of color. You cannot wash it away with a wave of the "that's privilege" wand. Life is not black or white. It's black and white.
Many of us achieve greatness because we're driven to be great. Some of us achieve it by spinning against our drive. There can be value in those of us that fuck up, but it requires the participation of those who can forgive.
posted by You Should See the Other Guy at 6:21 PM on December 25, 2015 [3 favorites]
His ability to forgive is anchored in his acceptance of the connectedness of all things.
I should preface the below by saying that I entirely reject the notion of retributive justice. The "right" of society to inflict harm, such as it is, upon those who commit transgressions, cannot, in my view, derive from retribution or be wiped out by forgiveness. The extent to which our systems of so called justice are systems of retribution is the extent to which they are systems of brutality. This applies in all cases, and not just to Polanski.
I have, however, come to take strong exception to the notion that those who are not the victims of a crime have a right to forgive it. Whoever else may have signed that petition, when Lynch signed it, if what he expressed was forgiveness, it was forgiveness for a crime the consequences of which he did not suffer. I cannot believe that this is laudable. I think of victims of abuse in my own life, and think what a disgusting affront it would be for me to tell them that I forgive the people who raped them. I cannot imagine those people ever wishing to speak to me again.
The ability to forgive does not imply a corresponding right to forgive. Rather, the right to forgive arises from a question: will forgiveness be given for this particular wrong?
Forgiveness is vital, but it is vital precisely because it is not general, not trivial, and can never be demanded or expected. The sacrifice involved in forgiveness is huge in correspondence to the evil suffered, and I see no significance in the forgiveness expressed by those who are not the victims of that evil. We might reasonably discuss who among the signatories of the petition might be considered victims of Polanski's crime in its structural context, but I don't think we would ever end up numbering Lynch among them.
Milch, in his reference to Goethe, argues that there is no crime he is incapable of committing. Such an analysis is hard to generalise. There are, I would suggest, certain crimes that can only be committed as a result of one's privilege, because their nature is shaped by the relationship between the perpetrator and victim. Additionally, the fact that I could commit that crime does not change the significance of the fact that someone did. I would want forgiveness, were I the criminal, but the act of empathy involved in recognising that cannot come at the expense of empathy for the victim, or the expense of trivialising the importance of their forgiveness by offering up our own easy and hollow simulacra of that difficult and vital act.
posted by howfar at 4:22 AM on December 26, 2015 [2 favorites]
I should preface the below by saying that I entirely reject the notion of retributive justice. The "right" of society to inflict harm, such as it is, upon those who commit transgressions, cannot, in my view, derive from retribution or be wiped out by forgiveness. The extent to which our systems of so called justice are systems of retribution is the extent to which they are systems of brutality. This applies in all cases, and not just to Polanski.
I have, however, come to take strong exception to the notion that those who are not the victims of a crime have a right to forgive it. Whoever else may have signed that petition, when Lynch signed it, if what he expressed was forgiveness, it was forgiveness for a crime the consequences of which he did not suffer. I cannot believe that this is laudable. I think of victims of abuse in my own life, and think what a disgusting affront it would be for me to tell them that I forgive the people who raped them. I cannot imagine those people ever wishing to speak to me again.
The ability to forgive does not imply a corresponding right to forgive. Rather, the right to forgive arises from a question: will forgiveness be given for this particular wrong?
Forgiveness is vital, but it is vital precisely because it is not general, not trivial, and can never be demanded or expected. The sacrifice involved in forgiveness is huge in correspondence to the evil suffered, and I see no significance in the forgiveness expressed by those who are not the victims of that evil. We might reasonably discuss who among the signatories of the petition might be considered victims of Polanski's crime in its structural context, but I don't think we would ever end up numbering Lynch among them.
Milch, in his reference to Goethe, argues that there is no crime he is incapable of committing. Such an analysis is hard to generalise. There are, I would suggest, certain crimes that can only be committed as a result of one's privilege, because their nature is shaped by the relationship between the perpetrator and victim. Additionally, the fact that I could commit that crime does not change the significance of the fact that someone did. I would want forgiveness, were I the criminal, but the act of empathy involved in recognising that cannot come at the expense of empathy for the victim, or the expense of trivialising the importance of their forgiveness by offering up our own easy and hollow simulacra of that difficult and vital act.
posted by howfar at 4:22 AM on December 26, 2015 [2 favorites]
if what he expressed was forgiveness
Was it, though?
posted by atoxyl at 10:50 PM on December 26, 2015
Was it, though?
posted by atoxyl at 10:50 PM on December 26, 2015
« Older Good grief | You heard me, Urich! Clean out your desk! Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by threeants at 2:08 PM on December 25, 2015