Roman Polanski and Public Education

[Cedars]

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.

 

Seperate issue (Awards).

 

From your article:

"It was not consensual sex by any means," wrote Geimer in her article. "I said no repeatedly but he wouldn't take no for an answer. I was alone and I didn't know what to do. It was very scary and, looking back, very creepy."

 

I wouldnt want to see John Wayne Gacy's clown art used in a painting class. I wouldnt want to see Charlie Mansons music used in music class. I wouldnt care if these were masterpieces of their discipline, in a public school, they shouldnt be held up as the only examples of quality. Theres plenty of masterpieces in both disciplines that qualify equally.

 

If Polanski would have stood trial and been released there would be no issue for me using his work now. But he evaded his day in court concerning a very serious charge. We're not talking tax evasion. We are talking a horrific crime against a 13 year old.

 

And again, its not like Polanski wrote MacBeth. The real topic is Shakespere. And in that there are plenty of choices for visual aid in a classroom.

 

Time heals wounds, and its good to see that Geimer has come to the point in time where the personal pain of the crime is lessened. But that does not negate a crime was committed. And the signal sent to other offenders (which are a larger number than one, Polanski), is evasion works.

 

I would not want my own DA saying, well.... the rich guy spent a bunch of time in France, doing what he always did, so we can forget about the rape of a 13 year old.... I would cast my vote the next election day for the opponent.

[TheFaithfulStone]

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?

 

Well, assuming they have read the play, yes, they are at an educational disadvantage to people who have seen the better film.

 

It would be like seeing that weird version of Romeo & Juliet with Leonardo DiCaprio in place of the Zeferrelli version. It's not the same experience.

 

People who haven't read "Howl" because Ginsberg may be a pedophile are at an educational disadvantge. People who haven't seen Jackson Pollocks work because he was a drunk and a philanderer are at an educational disadvantage. There are plenty of other poets, and there are plenty of other abstract painters!

 

Polanski may be a bad person, but he's a gifted artist. John Wayne Gacy however is a bad person and a bad artist, so that's really a straw man.

 

People who are exposed to inferior art for "moral" reasons are being done an educational disservice, absolutely.

 

TFS

[TheBigDog]

People who are exposed to inferior art for "moral" reasons are being done an educational disservice, absolutely.

 

TFS

Then it is a question not of morals, but of values. You are willing to let morality slide for the sake of education in this case. I am not. Seems like a simple enough difference.

 

Bill

[TheFaithfulStone]

Fair enough. I consider this to be a relatively minor moral infraction - one that the value of the artistic exposure outweighs.

 

See, everyone can get along. :hihi:

 

Question: If the teacher had responded that way, would you have been happy? Is there a solution where the students get to see this film?

 

Personally, I wonder why they didn't go see the actual play, which would be better than any movie.

 

TFS

[TheBigDog]

Fair enough. I consider this to be a relatively minor moral infraction - one that the value of the artistic exposure outweighs.

 

See, everyone can get along. ;)

 

Question: If the teacher had responded that way, would you have been happy? Is there a solution where the students get to see this film?

 

Personally, I wonder why they didn't go see the actual play, which would be better than any movie.

 

TFS

They are seeing the second half of the film as I type this. There was apparently little I could do to stop it. I am sure that the colleges in the area would have a video version of their performance of the play they could loan out to the local high school. And maybe even some students or staff from the drama department willing to come and discuss the play? I remember Shakespeare in HS, and having to actually perform the play as a class, and listen to a recorded version. Although I don't recall MacBeth specifically. I remember Romeo & Juliette and Hamlet. But I never took a British Literature class. :shrug:

 

Bill

[Igby]

I wouldnt want to see John Wayne Gacy's clown art used in a painting class. I wouldnt want to see Charlie Mansons music used in music class. I wouldnt care if these were masterpieces of their discipline, in a public school, they shouldnt be held up as the only examples of quality. Theres plenty of masterpieces in both disciplines that qualify equally.

 

If Polanski would have stood trial and been released there would be no issue for me using his work now.

John Wayne Gacy and Charles Manson both stood trial. By your own reasoning, you should have no problem with public displays of their art.

 

I saw Polanski's Macbeth and read the play when I studied a unit on appropriation. As a student, I would have been outraged that I was not able to study Polanski's Macbeth because a parent had complained about the director's crimes. :evil:

[Cedars]

John Wayne Gacy and Charles Manson both stood trial. By your own reasoning, you should have no problem with public displays of their art.

 

I saw Polanski's Macbeth and read the play when I studied a unit on appropriation. As a student, I would have been outraged that I was not able to study Polanski's Macbeth because a parent had complained about the director's crimes. :hihi:

 

First, I didnt say public display, I specifically said in a public school. Secondly I said if Polanski had been found not guilty I wouldnt have a problem with his works being used in a public school. In earlier posts I did distingush between banning the work from the public and not using it in a public school setting. My position is that I dont see any of this as an effort to ban the art of the artist. See post #8 and #23.

 

But I will add this to help you along a bit when thinking about 'my own reasoning'. By my own reasoning, OJ Simpson, should he create art (for example), would be eligible to have that displayed in a public school setting. What about OJ Simpson coming in and speaking to the football team about the factors he used in his position as a running back? I imagine more than one set of parents would have an issue with that. This is not to say I wouldnt change my mind and add OJ Simpsons art/football tips to the list of things that should not be allowed in a public school.

 

And its not like I dont have some experience with the attempts of some people to ban things from a school setting. When I was a student, I was asked by the principal to review and write a paper on a book some parents wanted banned from the library. The book mentioned homosexuality and this was their reason for attempting to remove an item. The story wasnt about homosexuality, it was about rumors, false allegations, jealosy, and the pain it can cause to an individual who is victimized by homophobes when being (falsely) labled as gay, in a high school setting.

 

And I also have experience with rape/sexual assault survivors (that occured with minors) and I have empathy for their feelings when faced with people such as Polanski running around France avoiding the charges against him. I would never take the chance in a classroom, that their might be a survivor of a crime such as rape, having to see a film by an accused rapist who fled the country to avoid charges. Would you support OJ Simpsons art in a school setting, had he fled to France to avoid facing charges for murder?

 

And as a parent would you change your mind if your kid got a bit 'outraged' when you stepped in and did what you thought was right for the school setting that is being paid for by you? Until you actually are faced with situations as a parent, you wont know how it changes your mind on some things as to whether or not they are appropriate.

[Igby]

:hihi:

 

I didn't read your post properly. My bad.

 

Would you support OJ Simpsons art in a school setting, had he fled to France to avoid facing charges for murder?

It would depend on what the art was and why the art was being used in the school. If OJ had the brains to write a memoir, and students were studying criminal history, I'd be all for it.

 

When I was at school as well as Macbeth I studied Mein Kampf and Birth of a Nation. Those are pretty inflammatory texts, especially Mein Kampf at a school which had a reasonable number of jewish students. Parents did not complain and, if they had, students such as myself would have complained about the parents complaining.

 

If I were a parent I would not step in and try to change the syllabus my child was being taught, unless it was something ridiculous like ID. I would respect my child enough to allow them to be exposed to hateful texts, lewd imagery, gore and immorality and not expect them to take that exposure as glorification. This study of Macbeth has nothing to do with Polansky and everything to do with the quality of the text. I think trying to have it removed from the classroom is an insult to the students, although I know it isn't meant that way.

[Cedars]

:doh:

 

I didn't read your post properly. My bad.

 

 

It would depend on what the art was and why the art was being used in the school. If OJ had the brains to write a memoir, and students were studying criminal history, I'd be all for it.

 

When I was at school as well as Macbeth I studied Mein Kampf and Birth of a Nation. Those are pretty inflammatory texts, especially Mein Kampf at a school which had a reasonable number of jewish students. Parents did not complain and, if they had, students such as myself would have complained about the parents complaining.

 

If I were a parent I would not step in and try to change the syllabus my child was being taught, unless it was something ridiculous like ID. I would respect my child enough to allow them to be exposed to hateful texts, lewd imagery, gore and immorality and not expect them to take that exposure as glorification. This study of Macbeth has nothing to do with Polansky and everything to do with the quality of the text. I think trying to have it removed from the classroom is an insult to the students, although I know it isn't meant that way.

 

You do not list the context of the study of Mein Kampf or Birth of a Nation (a film based on two books) so I cannot comment on whether or not it was appropriate use. And as far as you know, no parents complained. As for myself, if the parents of Jewish students did complain, I would have supported their position. Just as I support the decision not to use the medical studies completed by Mengele, regardless of how medicine may have learned something to benefit mankind.

 

There are plenty of hateful texts, lewdness, gore, and other immoralitys available to use as teaching tools without including the works of criminals, fleeing felons, etc. Shakespeare displayed all of this without condoning them, and the schools can accomplish this without being dismissive of the actions of criminals and escapees from justice.

 

If Polanski had the talent (read brains to write) of Shakespeare, he would have wrote his own classical works. This isnt about banning Shakespeare in a Brit. Lit class, its about the tools this particular teacher (who has admitted not being aware of the rape charge), chose to use in a public setting, and touches on ethics, rather than personal taste in selecting materials used as a visual aid in the classroom.

 

You conflict yourself in your statement. It would depend (when talking about OJ) and yet you argue that a jewish parent is wrong to protest the use of Mein Kampf.

[Igby]

I didn't contradict myself. I didn't say I would protest the use of the text; I said my support of the use of the text would depend on the context of its use. While I might disagree with the use of a text, I would leave the complaining to the 17 year old students.

 

Birth of a Nation was for a course on the US from the Spanish-American war to Pearl Harbor. The study of Mein Kampf was part of an elective unit about Hitler's rise to power. I would disagree with any parent who tried to remove Mein Kampf from the course, because it implies that the students don't have the moral autonomy or intellectual capacity to understand that the dictum "jews are bad" is wrong. I don't believe censorship of texts in schools is based on anything but a lack of faith in the students' values.

 

Originally posted by Cedars

There are plenty of hateful texts, lewdness, gore, and other immoralitys available to use as teaching tools without including the works of criminals, fleeing felons, etc. Shakespeare displayed all of this without condoning them, and the schools can accomplish this without being dismissive of the actions of criminals and escapees from justice

We obviously disagree on this. I don't think showing Macbeth in a school condones, dismisses or refers in any way to Polanski's crime. The film is simply an interpretation of Shakespeare, and I have only ever heard of it treated as such until now.

[Cedars]

You contradict by acknowledging there may be valid reasons for not using OJs work (and I would argue that even criminal history is not a place for OJs work being as he is technically not a criminal) yet deny that Jewish parents havent a right to complain when Mein Kampf is used. Having had the priviledge of meeting a holocaust survivor when I was young maybe makes me a bit more sensitive to the issue of Hitler. There is no person of Jewish heritage who thinks the world should forget what happened, that I am aware of, so the effort here is not suppresion of history, rather it is the ethical dilema on whether allowing such a horrific politcial idealism into the classroom is wise or not.

 

I grew up in a home that had a copy of Mein Kampf on its bookshelf, the same bookshelf which held a copy of Shakespeare. And I most certainly would not have brought that copy of Mein Kampf to school with me on any occasion, including my various classes which covered WW2. Even at my most rebellious stages of youth I had enough compassion for others to realize the dark nature of that text and the harm it caused to millions of people. I have not read that particular book simply because I dont need to read the words of this particular criminal to decide that what culminated into the Final Solution was a horrific endeavor. So I dont understand how you can justify the need for this particular book to convey the history of Hitler (note I am not saying denial of the books existance), when there is so much information available that will give you the same information.

 

Information on countries banning Mein Kampf:

http://www.globaljournalist.org/magazine/2006-2/forgetting.html

 

Quote from above link:

“There are certain categories where speech is not protected,” Miczkiewicz says. “One of them is propagandizing war; another is increasing hostility among ethnic and religious groups and there is a small list of them which you will find in the European Convention of Human Rights and which then are built into not only press laws, but also constitutions of these countries."

 

As far as using Birth of a Nation (if I am correct and you are describing the silent film) the reality is there is no need for using this in a classroom other than shock value. Its fiction and is not necessary in a history class and could be said to add to misinformation on actual history. But for this arguement its a strawman being as neither the author of the books nor the director of the film are charged with and fleeing or convicted of heinous crime and I should have noted that in my first response to avoid its continuation in this thread.

But incase someone is curious for more info:

http://www.filmsite.org/birt.html

 

As far as having "faith" in a people who I havent met. I dont need to have faith to come to the conclusion that supporting criminals such as Hitler, Polanski, Manson, Gacy, etc, even if it seems as slight as reading/viewing their 'contributions' is best left up to the individual on their own time, outside of a public school setting. The ethical values a public school is held to can be quite different than the ethical values you as an individual can choose to subscribe to.

[Igby]

1. I take serious offense to "Having had the priviledge of meeting a holocaust survivor when I was young maybe makes me a bit more sensitive to the issue of Hitler." My "sensitivity" is a non-issue, and I resent the implication that my opinions about censorship arise because I'm some kind of politically incorrect recalcitrant. I've also met with Holocaust survivors and I'm Jewish. My opinions are not due to a lack of perspective. The study of Mein Kampf was an elective, so is different to the Macbeth case since I presume the literature course was compulsory. The cases are also different because Macbeth has no intrinsically evil message. Mein Kampf is a more extreme example of a potentially censored text, and I know that the opportunity to study it was rare and likely controversial. That still doesn't change my belief that teaching the book should not have been banned.

 

2. I never said Jewish parents didn't have the right to protest Mein Kampf's use. I said I wouldn't have agreed with having the text called to be banned from the classroom, and I would have complained right back. There is a vast difference between claiming someone has no right to say something, and stating that once they had commented I would exercise my right of reply. Don't twist my words.

 

3. Parents complaining about the use of texts in schools is not a reflection on the school's ethical standards. It is a reflection on the parents'.

 

We fundamentally disagree on whether parents should intefere in school syllabi. That's fine. There's no point in disagreeing further. If you want me to explain myself further then I will, but this is a debate based on something we will not agree on and, hence, I fear the only common ground we will find is "Mein Kampf is an evil text".

[Cedars]

My indicating that MY sensitivity may be due to MY experience has no implication on what your stand is or why you chose that position. You seem to be interpreting the reflections I am making about MYSELF and transposing them onto yourself. There is no reason to be 'offended' that I can see and I wont hide my experiences because you might think I am trying to sublimally accuse you of something as trivial as not being politically correct. Your not a victim here, just another person with an opinion.

 

Parents did not complain and, if they had, students such as myself would have complained about the parents complaining.

You stated your complaint would be against the parents, not the [hypothetical] appeal to remove the book. So I didnt twist your words.

 

Parents (and whole communities) do have a vested interest in the ethical standards they expect from a school that they pay for and use as a tool for the childrens future. And they do have a right to express and try to change a syllabi that they find offensive or wrong, or a misappropriation of time, money, etc. You want to read Mein Kampf, do it on your own time, outside of a public school.

 

Added:

The study of Mein Kampf was an elective, so is different to the Macbeth case since I presume the literature course was compulsory. The cases are also different because Macbeth has no intrinsically evil message. Mein Kampf is a more extreme example of a potentially censored text, and I know that the opportunity to study it was rare and likely controversial. That still doesn't change my belief that teaching the book should not have been banned.

 

The course was about Hitlers rise to power according to you. Hitler was a criminal. There is a wealth of information to convey the same data without using this one text as a teaching tool. The issue is about whether a criminals (or fugitive from justice) works should be used as teaching tools when there is other methods, equally legitimate, available to public schools.

 

The opportunity to choose to study Mein Kampf on your own is not compromised by school not using that particular text in class. Here:

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/104-8218687-6246357?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=mein+kampf&Go.x=11&Go.y=11

Lookie EBAY!

http://books.search.ebay.com/Mein-Kampf_Books_W0QQfkrZ1QQfromZR8QQsacatZ267QQsubmitsearchZSearch

 

No one is saying Shakespeare should be banned from schools, so the use of MacBeth isnt the issue.

[Spiked Blood]

You want to read Mein Kampf, do it on your own time, outside of a public school.

Why? You're not suggesting that one should... gasp.. do school work in school?

Everytime is your time!

http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/

[Cedars]

Why? You're not suggesting that one should... gasp.. do school work in school?

Everytime is your time!

http://www.hitler.org/writings/Mein_Kampf/

 

Worse yet, I am suggesting that people could give up skateboard time to read things not available in class...