In Vino Veritas?
The big story out here this past weekend has been Mel Gibson's DUI. It's not the arrest, it's the outrageous stuff Gibson said during the incident.
Apparently, he was highly abusive, threatening the arresting officer and others. What's getting the most play, understandably, are his comments about Jews. Allegedly, he made a number of anti-Semitic statements, including "Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world." (Since what he said is on tape, this may be a verbatim quote.)
Gibson has previously had trouble with the Jewish community. Some thought his movie The Passion Of The Christ was anti-Semitic and also felt he didn't fully distance himself from his father's Holocaust denial.
The next day, Gibson put out a statement where he said "I acted like a person completely out of control when I was arrested, and said things that I do not believe to be true and which are despicable. I am deeply ashamed of everything I said."
A few friends emailed me wondering what I thought of the whole affair. I guess if Gibson wants to apologize for things he said while drunk, I'll accept it. Let me put it another way. There are millions and millions of people out there who are willing to say what Gibson said when they're sober. Let's worry about those people first.
PS Mel Gibson is still a lot shorter than William Wallace.
posted by LAGuy @ 12:32 AM
7 Comments:
Coming so shortly after the cursing post, I thought LAGuy might have commented on the fact that Mel used the f* word quite frequently. If liquor did act like truth serum for him it revealed more than a nascent racism, but also an enormous ego. "I own Malibu." I think that LAGuy is very likely more generous than most will be about Mel's apology. In several interviews Mel has come off as quite manic and not unlike the character he played in conspiracy theory.
Fundamental question: If part of who we are is formed by our parents / heredity / environment, what does that do to the concept of blame?
The cultural "Right" has tended to hold each individual responsible for his actions. The cultural "Left" has tended to explain most crimes as the fault of society.... except for racism, which the Left doesn't excuse in this way.
Yet the Gibson case seems to be a clear example of this. From everything I've read, Gibson seems to hold much more mild views than his father. Gibson may think that "the Jews" run Hollywood (but not Malibu, apparently!), but he doesn't deny the Holocaust. Gibson Sr marries a much younger woman and bosses her around; Mel defers to his wife and says she's smarter than him. Gibson Sr is certain that the popes since 1959 have been evil impostors and that Protestants are all heretics; Gibson Jr goes to a schismatic church but at the same time hires Jesuits from Loyola Marymount University to advise him on his movie and reaches out to evangelicals.
So I myself find it very hard to know what to think: should Mel be condemned for his evil views, or praised that he has managed to partially mollify the views he inherited from his father?
(In any event, his antisemitic views need to be unambiguously condemned. But that's a separate issue from whether the man himself is fully culpable for his prejudices.)
I always find it amazing how irrational most anti-Jewish prejudice is. (A small fraction is rational, but false -- there's a difference.) What I mean is, when someone tells me that "the Jews run the media", I ask them, "Who exactly are 'the Jews'? Do you mean all Jews, or just some of them? If just some, are you talking about a tiny secret society of Jewish people, or a group that includes virtually all adult Jews, or...?"
In virtually every case, they simply cannot comprehend my question.
I'm sure no one will misunderstand that I'm claiming what Gibson said was okay. It's more about keeping our eyes on the prize and trying to put this in perspective.
As to profanity, I expect if I were drunk and arrested by the cops, I might let loose with some colorful expressions. But while I don't think swearing limits your vocabulary, I think drinking does. (Once again I'm going against the grain, since so many think a drop loosens the tongue, and so many great writers drank).
The Right sometimes claims the Left has no standards, but they do, just different ones, so they seem like they don't exist. (The same way, say, early Christians seemed to be atheists to some Romans.) The Left has trouble saying one culture is better than another, partly because there's such an ugly history of judgment in the past. However, there are times I wish the Left were more consistent, because they don't have much trouble condemning the West, particularly the US and Israel. This is similar (and related) to the way they will excuse a lot of things but not racism.
Jews are about 2.5% of America's population. I'd say there are a lot of groups with more power. If, in fact, Jews have a somewhat disproportionate effect on our culture, it's not something to be ashamed of, it's something to celebrate. It's simply a sign of how hard Jews have worked (and also that we live in a free country).
Generally
1. liquor loosens the tongue and while statements made under the influence may not reflect the deepest hidden-most, they are a pretty good indication of what's floating around at a superficial level.
2. Personal experience (both direct and observed) indicates that being pie-faced does not generally make one more articulate but however, in some minds, the combination of impaired confusion, greater propensity toward impulsiveness and increased lack of discretion and the wonderful ability of the human brain to try to correct &f unction through all these obstructions can lead to some wonderful linguistic expressions (and admittedly can also lead to a lot of "WASSUP" and burping too),
All of that is a digressive way of saying that I think Mel really demonizes the Jews (probably more as a concept) and is smart enough to be ashamed by it. Sorry bad parents are no excuse.
I must refute Mr. King's assumptions about Mel Gibson's attitude toward his own wife. He may think Robyn Gibson is smarter than he is, but he also believes she is going to Hell because she is not a Catholic, and that he will not see her in the afterlife. And I have not seen evidence that Mel Gibson defers to anyone, let alone a woman who has put up with his philandering and alcohol abuse for nearly thirty years, and who has stood by while he has forced their eldest daughter into a convent.
Yes, Gibson does think his wife (an Episcopalian) is going to hell. I think that supports my assertion -- if Gibson had some sort of control over his wife, he certainly would have "made" her convert to his church in order to save her.
I haven't heard anything about him forcing his daughter into a convent, and I was unable to find this on the web anywhere. Do you have any details? In particular, was this in the United States? It's illegal under Roman Catholic canon law and the laws of all fifty states in the USA for someone to be forced to join a convent against their will.
Post a Comment
<< Home