Category Archives: Life In These United States

Cinematics, Life In These United States

Moving Violation

There’s part of me that could care less about Roman Polanski’s current predicament. Arrest him, don’t arrest him–who cares? Thirty-plus years after the fact, is pursuing one criminal really so important? Surely, the Los Angeles DA’s office could use their resources toward more pressing matters, like bringing Vic Mackey to justice.

But then I read sophistic articles with cherry-picked morality, like a guest op-ed by Robert Harris in yesterday’s New York Times. That’s when I think, lock him up and throw away the key. Because Polanski doesn’t seem to have a leg to stand on, save for those extended by famous folks who want him to remain free because he’s such a wonderful artist, and his crime was committed more than 30 years ago.

Did you know that once enough time has passed, everything’s okay? Hoorah! These same folks never seem to mention the fact that he raped a 13-year-old. (I heartily recommend an excellent takedown of many of Polanski’s defenders penned by Kate Harding at Slate).

And yes, I realize that for some offenses, statutes of limitation mean that enough time = okay. Rape is not such an offense.

The piece by Harris (a novelist by trade), like many defending Polanski, hinges its case on a few items that stem more from personal biases than any legal or moral grounds. In Harris’s case, it’s because he works with him. And so have other people. And some people seem to like him so, hey, it’s all good!

For more than two and a half years I have been working almost continuously with the director Roman Polanski…I have never collaborated with anyone more closely.

So when…the news broke that Mr. Polanski had been arrested …my first response was to feel almost physically sick. Mr. Polanski has become a good friend. Our families have spent time together. His daughter and mine keep in regular touch. His past did not bother me, any more (presumably) than it did the three French presidents with whom he has had private dinners, or the hundreds of actors and technicians who have worked with him since 1977, or the fans who come up to him in the streets of Paris for his autograph.

If a friend of mine was arrested, I’d feel pretty awful too. But if that friend was arrested because he’d eluded a rape conviction for 30+ years, I might feel a little less awful. That’s just me.

I’m sure fans come up to Roman Polanski and ask for his autograph. I’m also sure if John Wayne Gacy was walking down the street, he’d be approached for autographs, too. They’re both famous. For many people, the reason why you’re famous doesn’t matter; they just want to approach Fame.

Hundreds of actors and technicians have worked with him? Great. Most of those actors and technicians are working people not in a position to turn down a paycheck, no matter who provides it.

As for French presidents’ opinion of Polanski, which presidents? You could say someone was admired by an American president, but if that president was Dubya, I’d hold that admiration in low regard. Just because someone’s an elected official, that doesn’t make them a great person, or even a good person.

If Mr. Polanski is such a physical danger and moral affront to civilized society that he must be locked up, even at the age of 76, why was he not picked up earlier, when he was 66, or 56 — or even 46? It would not have been hard to grab him at his home: his name is on the doorbell.

Except that France would be unlikely to extradict him on “he is such a great artist!” grounds. Also, keep in mind that France ain’t exactly the most sensitive nation when it comes to women’s issues. (Serge Gainsbourg is a national hero there so, ’nuff said.) Over there, Polanski is being portrayed as the victim, because his victim’s mother “forced” the girl on him. And just look at what she was wearing! She was asking for it! And by it, we mean “being fed champagne and quaaludes, then sexually assaulted while repeatedly saying ‘no’.”

On only five occasions — right at the outset, when he flew to London; in 1986, when it was rumored he might visit Canada; in 1988, when it was suggested he might be headed to Brazil, or elsewhere in Europe; in 2005, when he went to Thailand; and in 2007, when he visited Israel — do overseas authorities seem to have been contacted by the district attorney with specific information about his presence. This is hardly a red-hot manhunt.

A local DA’s office–even for a large city like LA–doesn’t have the resources to track a fugitive around the globe. In order to make inquiries like the ones Harris alludes to, a DA’s office has to have cause. In order to have cause, you have to have tips. Where do these tips come from? Wherever they can get them. And the longer a case goes unresolved, the less frequently tips trickle in.

Plus, they would need to nab Polanski in a country where the government would be likely to hand him over to the US. All of this needs to be considered before you send someone on a plane to fetch him. You can’t go send a spare cop to a city where he might be and the local authorities might let you extradict him. Because if you do, and he’s not there–or worse yet, he is there but you’re not allowed to arrest him–it’s much less likely you’ll ever get another chance to bring him to justice.

It sounds very much as though Mr. Polanski became overconfident, both in the rightness of his own cause and in the safety of Switzerland as a refuge — a country that after the credit crisis suddenly seems to be much more eager to cooperate with international authorities. Its volte-face on its famous guest has drawn understandable contempt and Mr. Polanski, in his cell, now has plenty of time to ponder the limits of Swiss hospitality.

I admit, I find it odd that Switzerland of all places would turn over Polanski. Especially since they’re still holding onto Nazi gold.

I make no apology for feeling desperately sorry for him. The almost pornographic relish with which his critics are retelling the lurid details of the assault (strange behavior, one might think, for those who profess concern for the victim) makes it hard to consider the case rationally. Of course what happened cannot be excused, either legally or ethically.

“Except I’m totally excusing it right now.”

But Ms. Geimer [Polanksi’s victim] wants it dropped, to shield her family from distress, and Mr. Polanski’s own young children, to whom he is a doting father, want him home. He is no threat to the public. The original judicial procedure was undeniably murky. So cui bono, as the Romans used to say — who benefits?

Yes, it’s okay to feel sorry for Polanski, if you feel that way. Yes, the coverage of his arrest has been salacious and sensationalistic. Yes, his victim says she forgives him. Yes, I’m sure he’s a loving father and his family misses him. Yes, there were some issues about his original trial.

The response to all of these questions is: So fucking what?

Your sympathy doesn’t excuse his crime. Nor do salivating news networks. Nor does him being a wonderful father (how many horrible, horrible people love their own kids?). Nor do the details of his trial. Nor, sadly, does his victim’s feelings on the matter.

Why not? Because he was tried and convicted of raping a 13-year-old girl. He’s never denied doing it. And nothing he’s done in his life since then has forced him to pay for that. Since fleeing to Europe, he’s lived the opulent life of a celebrity and continued to make films. What kind of message does it send to not arrest him? Stay out of the country 30 years and you too can beat a rape conviction?

You may enjoy Polanski’s films, and that’s fine. That has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not he goes to jail. Would you feel better about his arrest if he was a Roger Corman-esque director of schlock? How about if he was just some ordinary schmuck who raped a 13 year old? Think he’d be able to hide in plain sight for the last 30 years and get op-eds in the Times written to defend him?

Roman Polanski did a horrific, unforgiveable thing. Does Rosemary’s Baby mean he doesn’t have to atone for it?

Life In These United States

The Sub-Atomic World of Two Year Olds

Being a parent is hard. Everyone knows this, whether you have kids or not. But you can’t know the true depths of how difficult parenting is until you have a kid. Don’t mean to pull rank. It’s just true.

There’s no one particular thing about being a parent that takes Herculean effort. You get used to doing certain tasks very quickly. Feeding, dressing, burping–no big deal, any of them. Yes, you can even get accustomed to touching another human being’s feces on a regular basis. After a while, it’s not a big deal. To this day, I’m more grossed out by baby food than I am by baby poop.

What is a big deal is the fact that it never ends. There is no punching out. There is no weekend. You are on red alert 24/7, and anything you do–even if it’s the absolute right thing to do–may scar your child for life. It’s like being in a combat zone, only not so relaxing.

dragkid.pngI say this because I ran across a video yesterday that gave me pause, in which a mother drags her kid (who’s on a leash-type restraint) across the floor of store. Your reaction to it probably depends on whether you have a kid or not.

If you don’t have a kid, you are likely think this is HORRIBLE and INEXCUSABLE and this woman SHOULD BE LOCKED UP AND NEVER BE ALLOWED TO BREED AGAIN!!1! The state of Alabama agrees with you, because they’ve thrown this woman in jail and are threatening to take her child away from her.

If you do have a kid, you probably think: Yeah, she shouldn’t have done that. But…

Because every parent has been driven to a point where they’ve contemplated doing something like this. Or something in the same ballpark. If you say you’ve never thought about dragging your kid home, you either have a team of au pairs or you’re a fucking liar.

Especially if you have a two-year-old. That is a very special age where a child asserts his/her independence but cannot be reasoned with in any way. It’s impossible to completely placate a two-year-old, because their whims operate under the laws of quantum mechanics. Call it The Toddler Uncertainty Principle: The more you think you’ve pinned down what they want, the more likely it is those desires just shifted in a completely different direction.

Two-year-olds have no agenda but their own pleasure and chaos. It’s like living with The Joker.

All this video shows is 30 seconds of a mother reacting poorly. It doesn’t show all the events leading up to the mother’s meltdown. Maybe this kid ran around the store like a maniac and didn’t listen to a word his mother said. Maybe he hauled off and hit her when she said he couldn’t have some dumb fuckin’ plastic toy he wanted. Maybe she heeded every direction that came out his mouth, and he still screamed “I hate you!”

Yeah, two-year-olds do that all the time. If an adult made demand after demand of you, and you met every single one, and they said, “Guess what? I hate you!”, what would you do? You’d kick that person in the dick is what you’d do. It’s hard to turn off the “I’ve just been horribly insulted” impulse in your brain, even if it’s your own flesh and blood disrespecting you.

You may be inclined to say, “It’s the mother’s own fault for raising an unruly child.” Two-year-olds are unruly. There’s nothing more unruly in nature, not even the sub-atomic world. Scientists are still trying to figure out why this tiny universe operates in ways that seem to completely defy the laws of physics. And we still know more about quarks than we do about two-year-olds.

I don’t care how well you’ve raised your kid, how many Baby Einstein tapes you’ve bought, how many foreign language flash cards you zipped in front of their face. Once they hit a certain age, they turn into monsters. It doesn’t last forever, but it might feel like it does.

Also keep in mind that two-year-olds are prone to complete and total meltdowns that have no real solution. In those cases, the best thing to do is let your kid cry/kick/punch their way out of it (while making sure they don’t hurt themselves or others, of course). That may lead you to look callous or negligent to others–as I found out during a trip to the ER earlier this year.

But you know what? Fuck the rest of the world. As a parent, it’s not your job to satisfy some idealistic BS idea of what good parenting should look like. Anyone who hasn’t spent an entire day being screamed at by a two-year-old has no right to judge.

Say your kid is screaming because he wants candy. He hasn’t had any dinner yet, so you say no. He flips out, making you look like The World’s Worst Dad to everyone else in Duane Reade. You could get him some candy to keep him quiet, and that might make the situation less embarrassing for you.

But is that good parenting? Of course not, for a million different reasons. All you’d do is give your kid a lesson that if he screams loud enough, you’ll do anything he says. And for what? So you could look better for a bunch of people who don’t know you and who you’ll never see again. “I’ve turned my child into a sociopath, but at least that weird old lady with the support hose and the purple hair at the prescription counter stopped staring at me!”

Should this woman have dragged her kid? Of course not. But I don’t think she made a conscious decision to do that; she just snapped. And I totally understand how a person could snap like that. I hope her home state will see it that way (assuming this was just a moment of insanity for her).

Seeing this video made me think of Louis CK’s bit on parental meltdowns. “What did that shitty kid do to that poor woman?!”

Life In These United States

Americans Celebrate 40 Years of the Great Moon Conspiracy

moon.jpgAP–For many Americans, it was the defining moment of their generation. All who witnessed can tell you exactly where they were when it happened. And though for some of us it may seem as if it happened just yesterday, today marks the 40th anniversary of the so-called “moon-landing.”

Across the nation, millions will pause and take time to remember that moment when America tried to pull the wool over the world’s eyes and pretend it put men on the moon. Some will watch old footage of this total mockery of science. Others will pull out old newspapers and marvel at the primitive techniques of photographic trickery that tried to sell this deception to a sheep-like public. Still others will send threatening notes to NASA, begging them to reveal the secrets behind this cheap facade that laughs in the face of truth itself.

“I remember watching it on TV, and seeing Neil Armstrong plant that flag on the moon,” said Jerry Derwood, a part-time web designer from Skokie, Illinois. “And seeing the Stars and Stripes wave in the lunar sky, I thought to myself ‘Hey, there’s no atmosphere on the moon! That flag shouldn’t be waving! Something’s fishy here!'”

In his spare time, Derwood runs the web site NeilArmstrongSuperfraud.com, one of roughly 675 million moon-conspiracy-related sites that have received a huge amount of hits in the last month, thanks to the hoopla surrounding the anniversary of The Great Moon Sham of ’69.

“A lot of kids can’t imagine what it was like back then to witness something like this,” Derwood said. “These days, ridiculous frauds are foisted on the American public all time. But children of my generation hadn’t yet seen such a blatant, cynical attempt to play on our emotions.”

Derwood plans to celebrate the event by standing at the foot of Buzz Aldrin’s driveway, demanding that he submit himself to a polygraph test.

Others will celebrate more peacefully, such as Mark Harlin, a freelance copyeditor who runs the web site TheMoonandOtherLies.com. “There’s no point in harassing the quote-unquote spacemen,” Harlin said. “They were merely pawns in the vast games of The Cold War and the machinations of the military industrial complex. Besides, there’s nothing I could do that would make these guys’ live any worse than they already are. How would you feel if you were party to such a snarled tapestry of lies, one that threatens to unravel at any moment? I wouldn’t wish that kind of living hell on my worst enemy.”

Harlin then launched on a 27-minute monologue about how no human being could withstand the radiation of the Van Allen belt.

This morning, President Obama marked the occasion with a speech punctuated by numerous ironic air-quotes.

“Today we celebrate the ‘achievements’ of the Apollo 11 ‘astronauts’,” Obama said, rolling his eyes at several key junctures.”At a time when America was reeling from the assassinations of Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr., and embroiled in a bloody struggle in Southeast Asia, you ‘bravery’ made America ‘believe in itself’ again.

“I only regret that the great Walter Cronkite passed away before we could mark this ‘anniversary’,” the President continued. “The sincerity and solemnity with which he marked the ‘event’ were almost enough to convince America that men had actually walked on the moon.”