She Was an Eighth Grader
The lingering case of Roman Polanski brings to mind an incident that happened a few years ago at a science fiction convention. Harlan Ellison, thinking he was being cute and witty, grabbed Connie Willis’ breast on stage. What erupted thereafter was a blog-storm of outrage, accusation and excuse-making. But the most interesting aspect of it was the way two camps quickly emerged from the ruckus. In Camp One were those who thought Ellison behaved in a demeaning and sexist manner. In Camp Two were those who thought everyone in Camp One should lighten up. If I had to guess, I’d say the average age in Camp One was about thirty and the average age in Camp Two was about fifty.
I’d call that progress.
The New York Times covered a similar angle today in an article entitled, “In Polanski Case, ’70s Culture Collides With Today.” I think they get it partially right. They discuss Woody Allen’s 1979 film Manhattan, where a forty-ish man’s affair with a seventeen-year-old girl is portrayed as the healthiest, sanest thing he’s done. They’re right that such a film would not be made today. And I think they’re right that Polanski would not have received so lenient a sentence today. But what troubles me about the Times piece is the way it never comes out and correctly identifies the crime for which Polanski is being pursued and to which he openly confessed.
Roman Polanski didn’t merely confess to “having sex” with a thirteen-year-old girl. He confessed to drugging and having sex with her against her will. Not statutory rape, but rape, plain and simple.
You can read clips of his own testimony here. But, for your own sake, do so on an empty stomach.
The “Petition For Roman Polanski” signed by over a hundred filmmakers, actors, and artists hoping to win Polanski’s freedom similarly glosses over the actual crime, referring to his troubles instead as “a case of morals.” What the petitioners mean by this couldn’t be clearer: Polanski is the victim of a witch hunt rather than the perpetrator of a crime. Having sex with a thirteen-year-old in a hot tub at Jack Nicholson’s house is just one of those things that happens in Hollywood. Lighten up, everybody. No harm, no foul.
They don’t mention the drugs he gave her, drugs with very specific muscle-relaxing properties, mind you. They don’t mention that she said no repeatedly. They don’t mention that, after fleeing his sentence, Polanski immediately took up with another minor, Nastassja Kinski. If there’s a clearer case of unrepentant pedophilia, I’m not aware of it.
Nor is Polanski’s pedophilia in anyway mitigated by the fact that he seems to think that everyone wants to have sex with young girls. Rather, it’s a sign of the decrepit company he must have kept. And, perhaps, of the decrepit leniency with which sexual assault used to be treated.
For this reason, it irks but does not surprise me that people like Martin Scorsese, Woody Allen, and Terry Gilliam signed that petition. But why did Tilda Swinton, Darren Aronofsky, and Alexander Payne sign it? Are they aware of the actual crimes they’re so anxious to pardon? And if so, what exactly would Polanski have had to do to this eighth grader to disqualify himself from their forgiveness?
Perhaps it’s naive of me, but I thought better of my generation. I thought we’d improved upon our elders.
This whole thing so enrages me I don’t have words. I’m glad to have you say them for me.
Seriously. All it takes is a few minutes of googling to learn the full horror of his crime. So either the petitioners are lazy, ignorant, or they believe child rape is just fine.
Lauren, I think there’s another opinion that may cause these people sign the petition: that is that Polanski’s contributions to society through his art redeem his crimes. These are the same people who gave him an Academy Award while he was a fugitive for the same crime.
To me, this argument is similar to saying Hitler’s talent as a painter redeems him for what he did. (To a different degree, of course.)
I think it says something about the egos of some people in Hollywood that their work allows them to rise above laws or morality. But I think this attitude is one of those negative aspects of human nature. It’s seen in high schools all the time – if you’re part of the In Crowd, you can get away with things that others cannot.
I suspect that a lot of those celebrities know Polanski personally and that there is some type of peer pressure going on here to support this petition. Let’s state the facts: 1) Man drugs and rapes woman. 2) Man flees sentence 3) Man must therefore pay. Never mind that this was years ago. Never mind that he’s famous and possibly talented. Facts are facts, a crime is a crime, and this man has to pay. Even if it upsets the stomach of his Hollywood friends.
Thanks for writing this. Now I have somewhere to send people when their “leave Polanski alone”-type sentiments get me so angry that I can’t put together a sentence.
french filmmaker jean renoir once said, in reference to te complicated and seemingly contradictory nature of his characters “everybody has their reasons.” i don’t think the support for or against polanski is generational, or that anything specific can be read into the petition by a bunch of hollywood types. had polanski been a novelist, every other aspect of his life remaining equal, i suspect there’d be a petition from a number of fellow writers in his favor who support him. for whatever reason. whether because of friendships or ideology or simple ignorance.
everybody has their reasons. the NYT story, the apologists, right or wrong, everyone has a reason. should he be returned for sentencing? absolutely. why did it take until now when he was living openly in the world and not hiding like a nazi war criminal? who can say.
sadly, i think the reason people feel they can forgive him is because they see a man who, had he served his time originally, would be free now and making the films he’d been making, and few people would be talking about this crime. his having committed it didn’t prevent others from backing his films, there was no effective blacklisting or boycotting of his films, no embargo against thier being shown here, so i suspect in some minds it’s as if we’re already living in that post-sentencing era.
He drugged and then *sodomized* a 13-year-old girl. Some of the things I’ve heard in his defense (”It wasn’t her first time anyway”) are downright stomach-churning. Others (”If the victim forgave him who are we to judge?”) miss the point. This was a heinous crime against the community.
All good points, folks. It seems insane to those of us who know the details that anyone would seek to pardon Polanski. But as David E says: “everybody has their reasons.” I think the petitioners’ reasons fall somewhere along the continuum of cloistered ignorance and privileged arrogance.
But I think it’s important that justice be done, no matter how belatedly. Otherwise it sends a horrible message to young girls and boys. We’ve made a lot of progress since 1978 on the subject of sex crimes and gender equality. There’s no need to dip backwards now just because the perp is famous.
Yes! Thank you. As I posted on Justine’s blog, we have to stop treating celebrities like royalty who are somehow above the law.
But it’s amazing the lengths people will go to not to have to admit someone they like did a horrible, horrible thing, isn’t it?