Lucretia (Rembrandt -- 1666)
Minneapolis Institute of Arts
If Republican women teamed up with DFL feminists, Minnesota comedy could be improved massively--right? It's not quite working out as I'd hoped. The attack by the humorless and the hyperliteral upon Al Franken is intensifying.
The comments come after the Republican Party held a news conference criticizing a 1995 story in New York magazine that quotes Franken joking about rape, while he and other "Saturday Night Live" writers discussed ideas for a sketch.
So Al Franken is now being attacked for something he is reported to have said in a brainstorming session more than a decade ago. Even if the quotation is accurate--Franken does not confirm its accuracy--few utterances merit greater protection than those made in brainstorming sessions, no?
In addition, DFL U.S. Rep. Betty McCollum of St. Paul released a statement saying, "it is appalling that anyone could characterize rape, a violent and horrible crime, as a joke."
I'm puzzled by the a violent and horrible crime, in the sentence above. Does McCollum seriously perceive herself to be bringing heretofore unknown information to public attention, when she informs us that rape is horrible? Isn't that just a little bit insulting? Or does McCollum think that violent and horrible crimes of all types should be forbidden from appearing within the brief fictional form of the joke? If so, McCollum's menace to American comedy--indeed, to American freedom--is frightening indeed. Fiction, like dreaming, is an activity rarely improved upon by busybodies. If McCollum and Brod seek to banish the word rape from American humor, why stop there? Why don't we agree that no work of fiction can ever include a rape? Wouldn't that make the world a better place?
Beware the politician who seeks to govern your conduct in brainstorming sessions, I say. Be particularly leery when it comes to the painfully unfunny legislator who believes American comedy might benefit by her proctorship. We expect such rhetoric from Republicans, of course:
"When he could talk about a skit and throw ideas out there, he chose drugging and rape," said Brod. "These are his words. He's painting his own picture. And I think the picture he's painting with his own words is a picture that Minnesota would absolutely reject."
Laura Brod and Betty McCollum's McCarthyite assault on imagination ought to be rejected.
4 comments:
I usually don't say anything about the ridiculous things that you write but some of your recent posts about McCollum’s response to Franken’s gaffes have been particularly absurd. According to you she has launched an “attack on imagination” and a “McCarthyite assault”, is humorless and a menace to American freedom. I understand why her statement puzzles you because your assessment is completely twisted. Do you really believe she thought she was bringing “heretofore unknown information to public attention” by saying that rape is a violent and horrible crime? She said that it is sick that someone would think that rape is something to joke about. It’s not. There is absolutely nothing funny about rape. No one is trying to “banish” anything. And really Gavin, banishing the word rape from American humor? When was it part of American humor?
Let’s get this right… this was not just a brainstorming session. This was published. Franken hasn’t denied it and that in itself is a confirmation. Of course it is accurate. If New York magazine published something false about him don’t you think he would have done something about it in 1995?
McCollum finds Franken's material in Playboy unacceptable but according to you in an earlier post, she wants a public execution of Hugh Hefner. She did not criticize Playboy, she criticized Franken.
The fact that she is a mother, aunt, former teacher and an elected official is relative because she is concerned about the effects the internet has on our children. Good for her. It’s good to know members of Congress are concerned and not joking about their children researching bestiality. I guess former hat salesmen, left-handed, near-sighted, athlete's foot suffering bloggers could care less.
Rep. Oberstar publicly asked Franken to disown the article days after McCollum’s comments dragging this out even further. Why haven’t you attacked him? Is he not also a menace to American freedom? Rep. Ellison said the article made him uncomfortable and that his constituents were appalled. Should he just tell his constituents to have a sense of humor and to stop their attack on imagination?
I'm not aware of any gaffe, in the classic, Kinsleyan sense, on Franken's part...are you? Indeed, Franken's current woes have not been caused by any gaffe--even in the broader sense of 'foolish-sounding misstatement'--have they? A preposterous, out-of-bounds accusation against Franken has been put on the table; Franken has responded poorly.
Do you really believe she thought she was bringing “heretofore unknown information to public attention” by saying that rape is a violent and horrible crime?
Betty McCollum: "[I]t is appalling that anyone could characterize rape, a violent and horrible crime, as a joke."
No, StPDem, I don't believe Betty McCollum believes she is bringing heretofore unknown information to the public attention. I think she's simply grandstanding. And I believe that dishonestly, ridiculously accusing your political opponent of 'finding humor in rape' in order to score a political point is most undignified.
this was not just a brainstorming session. This was published.
Have you even read the relevant passage? It was a brainstorming session. Yes, we both agree it was published; that fact is not in dispute.
Franken hasn’t denied it and that in itself is a confirmation. Of course it is accurate.
When I saw your comment, StPDem, I seriously considered not responding. I'm not required to respond to every comment--even on my own website--right? Had I not responded, could you fairly accuse me of having implicitly acknowledged the accuracy of your suggestion that my perspective is ridiculous and twisted, as you allege in your comment? In Franken's case, remember, he had vastly less of 'an obligation' to respond. The article was published in 1995, before most of us were even online 5,125 words deep in an article and it described an alleged Franken contribution within a brainstorming session. Franken would have no ethical obligation to respond to such a publication. Not responding would in no way constitute an acknowledgement of the accuracy of the article.
The fact that she is a mother, aunt, former teacher and an elected official is relative because she is concerned about the effects the internet has on our children. Good for her.
No, McCollum is holding out the 'mother, aunt, former teacher and an elected official' crap in order to intimidate people from disinterestedly evaluating her accusation. Bad for her.
It’s good to know members of Congress are concerned and not joking about their children researching bestiality.
Pure grandstanding--pathetic. Next?
Rep. Oberstar publicly asked Franken to disown the article days after McCollum’s comments dragging this out even further. Why haven’t you attacked him? Is he not also a menace to American freedom? Rep. Ellison said the article made him uncomfortable and that his constituents were appalled. Should he just tell his constituents to have a sense of humor and to stop their attack on imagination?
Yes, I agree that all of those participating in the Playboy/NYMag pile-on merit criticism. Fair point.
Actually, I am aware of a gaffe. His gaffe was exactly what you said – his lack of response. He was asked to address the articles and he refused. He knew people were offended and others didn’t think it was appropriate. He knew state legislators were worried about how it will affect their own elections. If Franken wouldn’t say something, why would McCollum do it for him? Was she supposed to say, “It was just a brainstorming session. He didn’t mean to offend anyone. He doesn’t really think that a skit about drugging and raping a woman would be funny”. No. He had his chance to do that himself. You’re right, he wasn’t obligated to respond but I think we agree that not responding only made things much worse.
I have read the article and I also don’t think it matters where he said it. It not only crossed his mind but he actually said it out loud, and obviously in front of a journalist. I still don’t understand why you think Franken needs to confirm the validity of the article. Who has ever needed to clarify to the public that something published about them is true? How do you know McCollum actually said what was published? Did you call her to confirm its accuracy?
It's exceptionally weird to judge a writer based on an idea he never published. Were the remark attributed to Norm Coleman, I would strongly advise any DFL state legislator against holding a grandstanding press conference prior to hearing Coleman's recollection of the event. I'd feel quite uncomfortable making hay out of a dumb idea Coleman was alleged to have put forward in a brainstorming session. Prior to Laura Brod's press conference, are you aware of any similar maneuver in Minnesota's political history--in which one politician publicly excoriated another for an account of his alleged contribution in a brainstorming session? Brod's conduct is utterly outside of the tradition of political discourse in Minnesota. I remain aghast at the success she is enjoying with her repulsive philistinism.
Post a Comment