Aug 03 2006
Mel Gibson: Reality Check
But before we deal with Mel …
I think of the inability to separate an author/composer/actor from his work as a liberal mental defect (”Wagner was a Nazi! Wagner’s music is anti-Semitic!”
The author and the book are two, distinct things. Judging a book because of the author’s politics is sheer idiocy. The same applies to movies, music, etc. Granted, sometimes moonbatiness drifts into the book or movie — Syriana is an excellent example. But the author and the book are separate.
Let’s turn to Mel and Passion of the Christ. I saw it. It’s far closer to right out of the New Testament than any other passion movie that has ever been made. There’s nothing anti-Semitic about it, unless you believe the Gospels are anti-Semitic. It’s certainly shocking and raw, but it’s a beautifully made film, easily one of the best to come out in the last ten years in terms of quality.
All this shock about Mel reminds me of the same reaction to Buchanan last month. A lot of people seem to have selective memories. There’s no more doubt that Mel is a bigot than there is about Buchanan, and for the same reason: Both have a long history of making stupid, bigoted remarks. Mel Gibson is a jerk.
Of course, Bill Donahue couldn’t resist the temptation to make an ass of himself. Always an idiot, Donahue chose to ignore the only issue here, and play the righteous card:
“Mel Gibson’s apology is a model of contrition, and it reflects the genuineness of his faith,†Donahue said in a statement Aug. 1. “Indeed, it stands in stark contrast to the ‘If you were offended’ type of apology that we are so accustomed to at the Catholic League. We trust that most Jewish leaders will now do the honorable thing and work with Mel so that all wounds can heal.
“There will always be those who refuse to forgive,†Donahue added. “They are a tragic lot. Worse, they are the only losers.â€
What’s forgiveness got to do with anything, you moron? He’s a bigot. Period. Expect nothing else from him.
I’d like to echo Libertas about one thing. Who decided Gibson was a conservative, based on what, and when?
I couldn’t agree more - although I’m still a little hazy on how Gibson is a figure of the political “right.†Although Gibson clearly used the conservative media to promote a product of his, Gibson’s politics remain vague. Basically Gibson appears to be an idiosyncratically devout Catholic whose agenda crossed paths with religious conservatives when his film came out, and also when Gibson lobbied against stem-cell research. Otherwise, it isn’t clear to me how the mythology of Mel Gibson as political conservative began. In fact, these days I’m sensing the opposite may be true: Gibson may be a left-wing Catholic much like … Michael Moore.
Certainly, with respect to any issue other than Catholicism, Gibson looks to me like a bed-wetting liberal.
So forgive him if you feel the need to, just don’t excuse him. He’s an idiot. He’s a bigot. He should lose his career over this (whether that happens or not).
26 responses so far
26 Responses to “Mel Gibson: Reality Check”
Many of the people whose art and music I enjoy are not people I would identify with. A person can shine in music, art, sports, business, mathematics, etc., without being moral, likeable, or (often) even sensible. Accomplishment in one area of life is usually simply that.
I try to see art and artist as separately as I can but never entirely.
Maybe I’ll rent “Passion” one day but I doubt it. Satan walking among the crowd of Jews is bad enough but four times seems a bit excessively un-Biblical.
My hunch is that Mel is a typical uneducated conservative Democrat like many a blue-collar American I’ve known - a bit bitter and cynical. I sometimes think that fits Buchanan too. I’ve never considered them to be Jeffersonian (for lack of a better shorthand term) and neither of them were ever real republicans or even Republicans. They would have both been at home with the Dixiecrats or maybe even the Klan. Only someone like that would think a good night out on the town was getting drunk and flirting with a couple of strange floozies. Mel’s a spoilt brat dumb wannabe jock - cute but irritating and too high-maintenance when drunk.
Although I said I forgive Mel (may I call him Mel?), I also think he’s a bigot and a jerk and I certainly do not excuse him for that at all.
I separate my appreciation of art and science from my view of the man. It is well-known that Heisenberg actively collaborated with the Nazis, yet I am in wonder at Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, the second shoe underlying Quantum mechanics; the first shoe being the concept after which my blog is named.
I enjoy Mel’s movies even though previous to this incident I knew that he was a bigot. But if a bigot steps on my toe and offers what appears to be a sincere apology, I forgive.
Forgiveness and Excusing are two different things. I never said I excused Mel for what he said.
I think we agree, no?
We’re to separate the work from the man, yet you think Mel should lose his career over this….which means no more work. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face!
He’d lose any other job for that crap. He should lose this one. Some things just aren’t tolerable.
ANY other job? You’ve been in academia too long. 95% of employers in this country wouldn’t care if you made anti-Semitic comments ON THE JOB (let alone off the job) as long as you showed up sober for work and got the work done. It’s only Liberal-land where expressing negative opinions about Jews is a firing offence.
As for what’s tolerable, anything is tolerable. The question is what you gain and lose by tolerating it. By destroying Gibson’s career, you lose his work. And you play into the hands of the anti-Semites, who can now say “Da Jooz made sure he never worked again.” The example won’t make anybody in Hollywood stop hating Jews, any more than the 50s blacklists turned them into capitalists. It will just teach them to SHUT UP about it, at least until the next time they get drunk. Which is the situation we have had heretofore, so there’s no gain from crucifying Mel.
Besides, he can’t be fired anymore; thanks to Christians, he can afford to fund his own films. Audiences could fire him, but lots of people in Hollywood have said and done more intolerable things and it didn’t hurt their popularity. (The only contrary example I can think of is the Dixie Chicks; does this mean that country fans are less tolerant than most Americans?)
And what’s the deal with wishing suffering on a fellow catholic Christian anyway? What would Jesus do?
Well said, we purchase clothing supporting the designer of the clothing knowing absolutely nothing about them, their prejudices, or what charities and causes they support. At least we know what Mel does with some of his money, and we know he makes good movies.
I don’t understand why some are calling him a bigot. In this enlightened age you would think that people would understand the psychology behind this. Mel’s Dad is a bigot. Mel grew up hearing things that he should not have heard. He has fought hard to NOT become like his Dad. Nothing in his behavior has indicated to me that he hates anyone.
It is not surprising that in a moment of drunkeness, he would be caught spewing an opinion (not really even an insult), that was hammered into him as a child.
Surely everyone here has said a thing or two they wish they could take back? Why should anyone torture him for a comment. You would think he was a terrorist planning to murder Jews or something!
Get over it!
“What would Jesus do?”
Probably scream at people to hate themselves and their families, and tell people to mutilate themselves… Honestly, I can’t think of a worse moral example than Jesus.
Pol Pot? Hitler? The Emperor Boukassa? Come on, even for an unbeliever like yourself, you can find lots worse without any exertion at all…IF you’re playing honestly, and not just indulging your hardon about Christianity.
Can you name a better moral example?
Let’s see proof. As for it’s all Daddy’s fault, Mel’s an adult. Serial killers don’t get to blame it all on Daddy. Neither does Mel.
Other than his bigoted remarks over the years.
You’ve got it ass backwards. Yale would offer him tenure on the spot if he spouted those remarks, better yet, called it research. But the private sector? You’re completely full of crap. He’d get canned. Immediately.
No, no, too unsubtle for Yale. To get tenure at Yale, you have have to talk about Zionism and the illegitimacy of the state of Israel. And (real) anti-Semitism (being against literally Semitic peoples as opposed to Ashkhenazim) would still get you fired at Yale.
Most Jew-haters (aside from the ones who dress it up in fancy geopolitical terms) are low class people, white trash and ghetti-dwellers. And there are thousands of places of employment filled with (and even run by) such. If they care at all, it’s only because of employee relations. When you’re worried about your workforce coming in stoned, or raping each other during coffee breaks, worrying about anti-Semitism is a luxury you don’t have. When you have to pay them enough that they can afford to sue, then you worry.
I’m as goy as they come, and I’ve been the object recipient of anti-Semitic remarks from black people. I guess any white intellectual with curly hair is a Jew
“Pol Pot? Hitler? The Emperor Boukassa?”
Yep, all better people than Jesus allegedly was.
“Can you name a better moral example?”
A better moral example than Jesus? Like I said, I can’t possibly think of a worse one. You are much more moral than the vile god you worship.
“You are much more moral than the vile god you worship.”
Yet another presumptuous liberal, I see. FYI, I am a WICCAN. And given the ultimately unitary nature of deity, I try not to blaspheme other people’s gods, because they might be my own.
I suppose that, in your opinion, Jesus came to Jerusalem to mount a putsch and kill a mess of Romans, but Judas was the patriot who kept the despot from gaining power?
“Yet another presumptuous liberal, I see. FYI, I am a WICCAN.”
If you’re a wiccan, then why would you defend those who would gladly burn both of us at the stake?
Why are you helping them?
Why are you helping those who would feed Christians to the lions, given that it’s a violation of the Threefold Law? The cycle of violence has to stop, here and now. And in a civil society, the best way to prevent witch-burnings is to support everyone’s freedom of religion…and their right to bear arms.
Funny, I have NEVER, not once, in a quarter-century in the Craft, heard of or encountered a living Christian who advocated burning witches. Not one. I did once encounter a young punk who quoted me “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.” My reply to that was. “Okay. Show me how much you love Jesus. Kill me. NOW. But remember, my religion, unlike yours, doesn’t require me to turn the other cheek.” Not even Fred Phelps talks about witch-burning. So who are you afraid of?
One reason I am sympathetic to Christians (maybe more so than I ought to be) is the attitude of so many pagani like yourself. One guy worships the Aesir, another guy is into the Roman gods, one does Egyptian, and it’s all good, nothing to have an opinion about. Some guy worships the Trinity, and he’s suddenly evil. There are a mess of Pagans for whom hating Christians is the sum total of their theology. I can’t make any sense of that in a Wiccan worldview, at all. But it makes perfect sense in the Christian worldview: you’re speaking Satan’s line. Does that mean Christians have a superior model of the universe? I don’t know; it’s a model I have problems with in other regards (Original Sin and sacrificial atonement, for starters).But when I see so many practitioners of “wishcraft” who can’t even do the simplest exercise in changing reality in conformance with will (like getting out of bed and getting a job), I have to wonder about its efficacy.
“One reason I am sympathetic to Christians (maybe more so than I ought to be) is the attitude of so many pagani like yourself.”
Yet another presumptuous conservative, I see. FYI, I am an ATHEIST.
Touche’.
But you spend a lot of time obsessing about what you don’t believe exists.
And where are those atheist-burning Christians, huh?
“But you spend a lot of time obsessing about what you don’t believe exists.”
Yes, because someone has to fight back against the theocrats who want to destroy the wall of separation between church and state. You know…the wall that you’re enabling them to destroy?
“And where are those atheist-burning Christians, huh?”
Biding their time until they are in power again.
“The wall I’m enabling them to destroy?”
Oh?
Show me where anything I have ever written would “enable” theocrats. Anything here (not just this thread) is fair game, and certainly anything on my own blog, http://blog.case.edu/jeffrey.quick/
In other words, put up…or shut up and be exposed as the troll you are.
“Show me where anything I have ever written would “enable†theocrats.”
Simple: you’ve all but admitted to defending them. You even admit to being sympathetic towards them.
“I am sympathetic to Christians “-JAQ
“You even admit to being sympathetic towards [theocrats].”-YALP
Do you notice the missing term here: “All Christians are theocrats”? I think you’d have a hard time proving that one…not that you’d even try. Since I can name one Christian who is not a theocrat, the argument fails.
Actually, my opinion of theocrats is the same as my opinion of kakistocrats, plutocrats, autocrats, pornocrats, and Democrats, or any other conceivable sort of -crat: they’re in need of psychosurgery with a high-velocity lead probe.
That should be “JALP” not “YALP”
And since when does a naked hypen create strikethru in html?
“That should be ‘JALP’ not ‘YALP’”
…..?
Ah, nevermind my post consisting of “….?”. Apparently, I didn’t see your comment above your clarification of your typo.
And I have never assumed that all xians are theocrats. Quite the contrary, it is you who have made a general blanket statement: namely that you are sympathetic with all xians. Since there exist xians who are theocrats, it follows that you sympathize with theocrats.
I’ll ask again: why are you helping them?
Oh, and by the way, I may be a bit bitter at xianity, but at least I don’t advocate killing all Republicans.
Why do you believe that my family deserves to be murdered in cold blood?