Roman Polanski and Public Education

[C1ay]

I do not think that my public tax money should be doing anything that may be lining the wallet of this man.

I doubt he's getting any of the money at this point. If the MPAA forwards any of his money to him so that he doeasn't have to come here to get it they are effectively aiding and abetting a fugitive. If it were my kid I'd simply sign the slip...

[TheBigDog]

What if the teacher paid for it out of pocket in hopes of generating classroom dialogue, and public funds had nothing to do with it?

It is something that I would hope would bring more moral outrage than I am hearing here.

 

Should we allow a teacher to pay for it out of their own pocket? At a college level? Perhaps. At a public high school? No. There are plenty of ways to bring about discussion without letting a fugitive child rapist profit from it.

 

This is not a class about Roman Polanski. It is a class on British Literature. And they are studying MacBeth. There are plenty of options for doing that without including Roman Polanski and "The Tragedy of MacBeth" in the solution. I do not want to consider what the agenda of an individual would be who would refuse to exclude this film from a high school level British Literature course.

 

And make no mistake, this is not about censoring art. I am talking about a public funds boycott of his work while he continues to be a fugitive from justice.

 

Bill

[TheFaithfulStone]

Hypothetical - if Roman Polanski isn't actually seeing one red cent of the twenty bucks or whatever that the school pays to rent this movie, then do you still have a problem?

 

TFS

[TheBigDog]

Hypothetical - if Roman Polanski isn't actually seeing one red cent of the twenty bucks or whatever that the school pays to rent this movie, then do you still have a problem?

 

TFS

I don't care if it is a fraction of a penny, or just a warm feeling inside.

If it were proven that he is making no money from the film's use then I would still take up the issue with the teacher as to why Roman Polanski became part of the class discussion when the topic is British Literature, and specifically MacBeth.

 

If I found out that he was donating the film for use I would say screw him. He lost the right to make amends on his own terms when he fled instead of facing the charges against him.

 

Bill

[TheFaithfulStone]

If it were proven that he is making no money from the film's use then I would still take up the issue with the teacher as to why Roman Polanski became part of the class discussion when the topic is British Literature, and specifically MacBeth.

 

And if she says - "It's because he made the best movie?"

 

Or, it could be because there's only one other "mainstream" film adaptation, and it was made in 1948. Maybe the Polanski version was the only one she could get a hold of!

 

TFS

 

edit:And, apparently, the 1948 version sucks.

[Cedars]

In no way did I understand the thread to be advocating banning of anyones art, only that in a public school setting, the people responsible for the choices on whos ideas to present should have some constraints on which 'art' to use to convey the message of the class topic. After all Polanski did not write the original, so its not like he presented a 'new idea', only another choice on how to interpret someone elses idea.

 

And that is the key issue for me here, the fact that there are other choices on how to present this topic, which I assume is Shakespere, in a British Lit. class.

 

http://www.imdb.com/find?s=tt&q=macbeth

 

Of course, the teacher could always assign the reading of MacBeth, rather than watching the movie.

 

 

There is also another issue which has not been mentioned so far. There is a definate possiblity someone in this class has either experienced sexual assault or is very close to someone that has. Brit. Lit. is not a place for a discussion on sex crimes (as has been suggested that this classroom would present an opportunity for discussion).

 

*wonders how many people from here are going to look for this movie next time they go to blockbuster.....

[TheFaithfulStone]

*wonders how many people from here are going to look for this movie next time they go to blockbuster...

 

:shrug: I'd already added it to my Netflix queue.

 

TFS

[Freddy]

In no way did I understand the thread to be advocating banning of anyones art, only that in a public school setting, the people responsible for the choices on whos ideas to present should have some constraints on which 'art' to use to convey the message of the class topic. After all Polanski did not write the original, so its not like he presented a 'new idea', only another choice on how to interpret someone elses idea.

 

And that is the key issue for me here, the fact that there are other choices on how to present this topic, which I assume is Shakespere, in a British Lit. class.

 

http://www.imdb.com/find?s=tt&q=macbeth

 

Of course, the teacher could always assign the reading of MacBeth, rather than watching the movie.

 

 

There is also another issue which has not been mentioned so far. There is a definate possiblity someone in this class has either experienced sexual assault or is very close to someone that has. Brit. Lit. is not a place for a discussion on sex crimes (as has been suggested that this classroom would present an opportunity for discussion).

 

*wonders how many people from here are going to look for this movie next time they go to blockbuster.....

 

I would be quite surprised if the students did not first read the play. That is the official standard for High School Literature concerning comparative media. After students have read the story, novel, or play they view the play or film and compare and contrast them. In history class I show April Morning and The Crossing to bring the American Revolution to life, but only after the students have studied the subject.

[Erasmus00]

It is not the film I have a problem with. It is letting him draw profits from public schools while he continues to be a fugitive from justice for child rape

 

At the same time: shouldn't students in a public highschool be entitled to the BEST possible education, regardless of who ends up profiting? Yes, there are other McBeth films, but Polanski's is widely regarded as the best. In my opinion, the end goal of school begin to educate (not bring fugitives to justice/keep money out of their pockets) I don't see a problem.

 

Also, Polanski isn't going to draw any profits from a video rental, and I'd be willing to bet they show it every year and have owned their copy of the movie for years.

-Will

[CraigD]

There are dozens of other versions of MacBeth that could be used in the class. None of which would be having a school give profits to a fugitive child rapist.

Proving that no one receiving profits from any particular movie is a fugitive child rapist could prove a difficult task. In addition to the labor of checking the background of everyone connected to a film, the majority of film production companies are private, so obtaining the details of how the films profits are disbursed to its investors – who, as a rule, make more money from a particular film than its cast and crew members – would require a court order.

 

I, and, I think, many people, share TBD’s desire to “keep clean” by seeing that we don’t financially or otherwise support people of whom we disapprove. In our current large, complex economy, satisfying this desire can be a difficult and wearying. Examples:

• For years, I bought the majority of my foodstuffs from a collection of small farmers I knew personally, who’s techniques and character I trusted. It was a hassle, leading me to increasingly “cheat” with trips to nearby grocery or convenience stores. Eventually, my cheating spread to the point that I buy nothing from my “ethical cooperative” sources, and all from large chain stores”.
  
• In the 1980s my town (Takoma Park, Maryland) declared itself a “nuclear free zone”. Town officers were required to purchase nothing from companies involved in the production of nuclear weapons and nuclear weapon delivery systems, without the approval of a special local ballot. This was financially hard, resulting in an increase in our local tax rate, and diminished quality of services (Our police car fleet of aging Volvo’s – Ford and GM have major military aerospace divisions – inspired satire and ridicule) After several contentious special ballots, narrow voter majorities allowed exceptions to the NFZ policies for particular purchases (Our Ford Crown Victoria police cars were very nice, thank you), and town officials began to “creatively” reinterpret the corporate structures of vendors to allow purchases from divisions of large companies.
  

A difficulty in implementing “keep clean” policies on the town or school (typically counties or special “school districts” is that these policies must be supported by the local populations. So, while some parents may be in favor of banning school showings of movies directed by Roman Polanski, or the library purchasing reprints of books by the late NAMBLA-supporter Allen Ginsberg, others may object.

 

While activism can have a very positive effect on one’s life and one’s community, there’s something to be said for “choosing one’s battles”. I doubt that an effort to financially sever a public school system from fugitive child rapist Polanski is a good battle to choose, nor one that, if won, would result in any reduction of child rape or other abuse and exploitation. I believe that putting the same effort into other causes would be more effective and satisfying.

[TheBigDog]

I received a reply in email today from the teacher showing the film. She essentially said that she was not aware of the nature of Mr. Polanski's crimes, and thanked me for informing her. But that the artistry of the movie was why she chose it. And to address the issue of profit she said that since the movie was already paid for, Mr. Polanski would not be making any money from this viewing.

 

Here is my response back...

The use of the film brings a conundrum into your classroom. If you are encouraging students in the pursuit of Shakespeare then they will certainly be drawn to the version you have chosen, which can only result in further sales and rentals of his film which will turn into his profit. If you discourage them from purchasing or renting the version you have chosen you bring into question your initial choice of film. Either way you either need to turn a blind eye to the moral and ethical attachments to the film, or take the focus of the classroom education off of Shakespeare and onto the history of Mr. Polanski.

 

You may find comfort in thinking that your actions do not promote the fortune of a child rapist fugitive from justice. But reality says otherwise. Your choice, while well intended, was poor. And given the opportunity to change course you did not. No amount of intellectual gymnastics will change the moral and ethical dilemma of using Mr. Polanski's film in your classroom. Either you condemn his crime for which he continues to evade justice or you don't. Either you choose to help him profit or you don't.

 

I am wondering, if you had known the full history of Mr. Polanski's crime, would you have still chosen to use his film in the classroom? I am faced with a similar dilemma. If I choose to publicly protest your choice, while I am educating people on the issue and might keep people away from Mr. Polanski's films while he continues to evade justice, I would at the same time certainly be intriguing others who might not have ever wanted to rent or buy one of his movies. So in taking up opposition to your choice, I must make a choice of my own. I can either just let it go and hope that my letter to you will dissuade you from using his films while he continues to evade justice. Or I can take the debate public, perhaps getting a commitment from the school to stop the use of his films while he continues to evade justice. But in going public I will certainly risk increased sales of Mr. Polanski's work, the opposite of what I wish to happen. So now we both have a problem.

 

A trick I use when faced with an unclear moral dilemma is to personalize it and then decide what I would do. If I was the victim of Mr. Polanski, or the parent of the victim of Mr. Polanski, and he had never faced the charges against him in court, how would I feel about the use of his work in schools? How would I feel about those who privately and publicly fought to prevent the use of his work in schools? In thinking about it that way, I guess I don't have a dilemma after all.

I am disappointed that even though we had initiated conversation on this, and she addmittedly had to do some research on the topic, she began showing the movie before her research had been initiated. My next step will be another discussion with the school pricipal, who didn't even know who Roman Polanski was when we spoke on Monday.

 

Bill

[TheBigDog]

Proving that no one receiving profits from any particular movie is a fugitive child rapist could prove a difficult task.

I am not looking to do a paranoid background check of everyone connected to every product. But that is not an excuse for inaction with regard to ones we do know about.

 

Bill

[TheFaithfulStone]

No amount of intellectual gymnastics will change the moral and ethical dilemma of using Mr. Polanski's film in your classroom. Either you condemn his crime for which he continues to evade justice or you don't. Either you choose to help him profit or you don't.

 

Pot, meet kettle. The intellectual gymnastics are the ones you're doing - even if Polanski doesn't make a dime off of this particular showing, then he's still "profiting" because of theoretical future profits that he might make someday because the students will be "drawn" to this version of MacBeth.

 

It's already been pointed out to you that this is widely considered to be the best film. The false choice you're offering the teacher here is to cave to your moral judgement (which many here at least consider flawed in this instance, so it's by no means a clear cut case) or to be condemned as helping a child rapist.

 

If I found out a teacher hadn't taught about Thomas Jefferson because he was a deist who denied the divinity of Christ, I'd be pissed. And if I found out a teacher had shown a "bad" version of MacBeth because Roman Polanski is a pervert I'd be pissed.

 

You've placed the teacher in an impossible position.

 

Speaking as someone who's taught before - nothing is worse than having a parent dictate curriculum.

 

You've made your opinion known, and I have no problem with you making it known to the principal as well - but I have to tell you, that I think you are dangerously close to making an *** of yourself.

 

 

TFS

[TheBigDog]

If I found out a teacher hadn't taught about Thomas Jefferson because he was a deist who denied the divinity of Christ, I'd be pissed.

Not quite the same thing. I am talking about a man who is activly evading the justice system. If he were to face the charges against him and be found innocent or guilty I would drop this. If he were dead I would drop this. If California were to drop the charges against him I would drop this. But supporting a fugitive of justice does not equate with with the Thomas Jefferson reference.

 

Bill

[Cedars]

I received a reply in email today from the teacher showing the film. She essentially said that she was not aware of the nature of Mr. Polanski's crimes, and thanked me for informing her. But that the artistry of the movie was why she chose it. And to address the issue of profit she said that since the movie was already paid for, Mr. Polanski would not be making any money from this viewing.

 

Here is my response back...

 

I am disappointed that even though we had initiated conversation on this, and she addmittedly had to do some research on the topic, she began showing the movie before her research had been initiated. My next step will be another discussion with the school pricipal, who didn't even know who Roman Polanski was when we spoke on Monday.

 

Bill

 

Good Job TBD!

 

I can believe that neither of these people realized Polanski is a fugitive. Its been what? 25 years or so since he fled the country.

 

One question I do have, someone posted a thought earlier that MacBeth was required reading and the film being used later as a follow-up. Do you know if MacBeth was assigned as a reading component in this class or was the film being used in place of reading the play?

 

I would suggest in further contacts with the school persons, that you would offer suggestions on films that could be used in place of Polanski's work (not necessarily MacBeth).

[TheBigDog]

And if I found out a teacher had shown a "bad" version of MacBeth because Roman Polanski is a pervert I'd be pissed.

I am quite sure that millions of people have studied MacBeth without the aid of Polanski's film. Is this film now the only way to study MacBeth? Are those who have studied by other means suddenly at a loss educationally?

 

Bill

[CraigD]

A trick I use when faced with an unclear moral dilemma is to personalize it and then decide what I would do. If I was the victim of Mr. Polanski, or the parent of the victim of Mr. Polanski, and he had never faced the charges against him in court, how would I feel about the use of his work in schools?

When asking this question, it’s informative to consider how the actual victim actually feels. In this particular case, the victim, Samantha Geimer, has publicly stated on multiple occasions that "I believe that Mr Polanski and his film should be honoured according to the quality of the work … What he does for a living and how good he is at it have nothing to do with me or what he did to me . . .”.

 

She has also stated that she does not wish criminal sanctions to continue to be imposed on Polanski. "I don't have any hard feelings toward him, or any sympathy either. He is a stranger to me. …My attitude surprises many people. They don't know how unfairly we were all treated by the press. The press made that year a living hell and I've been trying to put it behind me ever since."

 

(same source as post #5, http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/02/1046540066443.html)

 

When one’s victim states that they don’t want one punished for a crime against her, I conclude that any additional sanctions can only be ascribed to one’s disrespect for the judicial system imposing the sanctions. I have grave misgivings about the government imposing sanctions upon anyone for this reason. Although in California, victims are not legally entitled to have criminal cases against their victimizers dismissed, I believe that the state would be acting in all the parties’ best interests if it did so.