I didn't mention the language in Gran Torino. That's because, when reviewing the movie in my head, I didn't think about it all.
It's...it's awesome actually. It's so totally freakin' hilarious, you could probably have a whole movie's worth of Eastwood doing nothing but spouting racial epithets and have a likely candidate for any "Top 10 Of The Year" list.
It absolutely sinks "PC", or it would were there any justice in the world. The Politically Correct Emperor has no clothes: What matters in life is what you do, not whether you limit your speech to a list of approved words.
Also, I just saw Benjamin Button, which Althouse has accused (along with Doubt) of being a sort of stealth pedophilia. I think that's pretty absurd for Doubt, and it strikes me as a bit of a reach for Button. Benjamin is clearly not an old man; he's a child who looks old.
Now, could you argue that they're some kind of titillation for pedophiles? Sure. So's a boy's underwear catalogue. And there may well be pedophiles in the underwear catalogue business, but that doesn't mean that they're the target audience.
Does that make sense?
In other words, when movies like these go out of their way to avoid any sort of titillation (Doubt) or completely desexualize adult-child encounters (Button), to take the pedophile angle is to say that these stories shouldn't be told at all.
Then there's the Camille Paglia/Jesus thing. How can this be controversial? I don't buy that non-believers are not allowed to comment on the Bible. Hell, it used to be a matter of education: You were not considered educated if you did not know the Bible, no matter what you believed in.
Besides, it's Camille Paglia. Controversial would be her saying she believed and she was advocating a life of celibacy for homosexuals. That would be edgy. (I should note that I don't think she's trying to be edgy there, just expressing an opinion that's not particularly controversial in her circles.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The Politically Correct Emperor has no clothes: What matters in life is what you do, not whether you limit your speech to a list of approved words.
ReplyDeleteI haven't seen it. But, based on your comment, I'm guessing that the Clint character is admirable in action. Assuming this, and agreeing w/ your observation quoted above--I'd rephrase by noting that the Clint character is closing the door to the so-called PC-busters, if their focus is busting-PCism, rather than being admirable folks who incidentally ignores PC restrictions.
As I'm sure you'd agree; rather than motivating folks to feel comfortable unleashing race based language, the more important lesson of the movie (based on your comment about "what you do") is that folks should aspire to the Clint character's admirable actions.
But, some folks seem to really appreciate the seeming freedom of using race based language. After reading comments on blogs this does seem to be one of the most beloved messages of the movie for some folks. Lovely.
BTW, I'm not categorically stating that the PC-police-police and racist language folks are horrible folks in all aspects of their lives. My, grandmother, who is a wonderful lady, thinks it's unthinkable and awful that a black man will be president, but she uses un-PC language (though not the N-word) to make the point. There is a reason folks find race based language objectionable, these words have un-admirable origins.
Hopefully, you realize that in the real world (i.e. un-scripted life) most fans of racial epithets are not using them in the pursuit of some sort of egalitarianism, and even if they are, it's hard to imagine that their good works depend on using race based language.
But, many folks, like you, LOOOOVE that the Clint character uses racist language, while doing good. That's the message; that a racist language aficionado (in this movie) does admirable things, hence this "absolutely sinks "PC.""
It's soooooo great!!!
Victory against those opposed to the Clint character's racist epithets!!!!!
Whatever floats your boat, I guess.
But, some folks seem to really appreciate the seeming freedom of using race based language. After reading comments on blogs this does seem to be one of the most beloved messages of the movie for some folks. Lovely.
ReplyDeleteYeah, what kind of asshole loves freedom of speech?
Hopefully, you realize that in the real world (i.e. un-scripted life) most fans of racial epithets are not using them in the pursuit of some sort of egalitarianism,
ReplyDeleteI think it's prejudiced to categorize people based on that sort of word usage. An aunt of mine used to refer to Mexicans as "beaners"--which offended my delicate sensibilities at the time--but she was married to a Mexican.
and even if they are, it's hard to imagine that their good works depend on using race based language.
Ah, yes, the "isn't really necessary" approach. Let's not do anything unnecessary if it might be offensive.
Actually, in the movie's case, his stubborn clinging to racial epithets is part and parcel of his unwillingness to go along with other forms of "progress".
This is true in real life, too, to a less dramatic extent.
Yeah, what kind of asshole loves freedom of speech?
ReplyDeleteLOL
I should not that I don't think she's trying to be edgy there
ReplyDeleteI like Paglia--always entertaining--but I think the desire to be edgy drives a lot of her "opinions."
Whatever floats your boat, I guess.
ReplyDeleteThe culture of political correctness is here to stay and you have to be afraid of the consequences of speaking freely in many different aspects of your life. I could be a hell of a lot funnier if I didn't edit myself so much, but it is too dangerous to do otherwise.
ReplyDelete