Omnia mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis
“All things change, and we change with them.”

Please note that this blog spans a broad period of time. The intervening years have brought many things into my life, including divorce and remarriage. As such, some older posts reference a relationship which is no longer active. In context, however, the portrayal is accurate.

For many reasons, I have chosen to let entries such as this one remain in the overall continuity of the site.

Dialogue excerpt from an argument this weekend…

Sandberg: Did you hear that report on NPR yesterday about the new study about children and violence and television?

TMC: I heard part of it.

Sandberg: It was amazing.

TMC: It was t-i-h-s-l-l-u-b. [Sam was sitting there and now that he can read and write, I have to spell my profanity backwards.]

Sam: B . . . u . . . b-u-l…

TMC: …eat your lunch…

Stephanie: …I can’t believe the statistics.

TMC: You shouldn’t. They’re bogus. Like all stats. And our kids only watch about four hours of television a week. And they’re monsters, so…

Stephanie: …you don’t think there’s a connection?

TMC: I don’t think that there is a connection, no…

[…argument over inane stats, racial, and cultural equity deleted because I can’t remember it…]

TMC: …well, I watched television about twenty hours a week when I was a kid, and I haven’t…

Sandberg: …and I’ve been waiting for the day when you finally snap.

TMC: It could happen sooner than you think.

Sandberg: I think the industry needs to be a lot more responsible about what they produce.

TMC: Yeah, well, that may be. But I’m against censorship in any form, particularly self-censorship.

Sandberg: But they do have to be responsible.

TMC: Or what? We’ll force them? Sorry, but I don’t think that I’m ready to see the Hayes code put in an appearance again. Or the Comics Code. Or anything remotely resembling either one. One good thing about Al Gore not being elected president is that this kind of obscenity won’t be mouthed in the White House on a daily basis. Although I don’t have a whole of faith in the present administration to recognize freedom of speech issues any more competently.

Sandberg: I just think that an artist has a responsibility to his audience.

TMC (ignoring the inherent chauvinism): Responsibility to do what?

Sandberg: To be aware of and respectful towards their sensibilities.

TMC (ignoring the dangling modifier): Respectful? What does this mean? Does it mean ‘accommodating’? Does it mean, wait a second, does it mean..?

Sandberg: …it means writing responsibly…

TMC: …and what can that possibly mean? Do you consider Tom Stoppard a responsible writer?

Sandberg: Of course.

TMC: Even though what he writes has offended someone, somewhere, at some point about religion or science or philosophy? What about David Mamet? Does he write responsibly?

Sandberg: Sometimes.

TMC: Oh, that’s safe. What about Sam Shepard? Or Brecht? Or Shakespeare? Was Shakespeare writing with responsibility towards his audience? How could he? His audience is still there after 400 years and our sensibilities have changed dramatically. Or Mark Twain..?

Sandberg: …oh…

TMC: …or Samuel Beckett, for that matter? Was Beckett someone who wrote responsibly? Was he aware of and respectful towards the sensibilities of his audience. Do you mean that someone — painter, writer, director, actor. movies, comic books — should say “Ooh, better not do that ’cause it might hurt someone’s feelings. Gee, that might really make someone angry and upset, might offend them if we do that…”

Sandberg: …I’m saying that there is a responsibility there. There has to be.

TMC: This is the director who staged a scene in a whorehouse to a predominantly conservative Christian Midwestern audience? With the covenant youth playing gamblers, thieves, and prostitutes?

Sandberg: You know what I’m saying.

TMC: I do. And I disagree with you. The only responsibility a writer has is to the work itself…

Sandberg: …you’re wrong.

TMC: I’m not. My only responsibility as a writer is to the work itself, to make it the best that it possibly can be. I have no responsibility (or ability, for that matter) to perform a psychic analysis of everyone sitting in the seats and decide whether or not something I write will offend them. First of all, it’s impossible. Second of all, it’s stupid. My responsibility, my only responsibility, is to the work itself, to make it as good as it can be. The audience has a responsibility to the artist, not the other way around.

(Turning to Sam, who started crying last time we had a similar argument at the dinner table.)

TMC: And for the record, chief. We’re not fighting, we’re arguing. So don’t start crying and whining about how we’re going to get a divorce. In thirty years you’ll look back on these battles and say “Man I sure am thankful that my parents had an elevated level of conversation around the house . . . and boy oh boy, was my mom full of crap.”

‘Cause she is. The Hayes Code and the Comic Code and all the rest were/are artistic McCarthyism that creative (ahem) industries imposed on themselves (or submitted to) in order to avoid out-and-out governmental oppression. If they’d stuck to their guns, they could have taken it all the way to the Supreme Court.

Not that this means anything, given how the last election was decided.

But my point is that it used to be the conservatives beating the crap out of art and theatre and film. They didn’t couch it in the language of social responsibility like the modern-day liberal crusaders do. They used morality to make their point.

The only difference between Frederick Wertham and Tipper Gore is that . . . well there aren’t a whole lot of differences, actually. (Apart from plumbing, but I’m not going there.)

Morality and family values is how the Right institutionalizes their oppression. Responsibility is how the Left plays the game.

Each is in favor of protecting art (and communication) that favors their support base while at the same time favoring the regulation or self-regulation of art (and communication) which they perceive as a promotion of the other side.

The artist creates the work. The audience thinks (and says) whatever they want about it. Neither group is allowed to remove that right from the other.

And I don’t think they should remove it from themselves: The artist has a responsibility to create, the audience has a responsibility to respond. Both should be done with as much skill as either is capable of.

I will write. I will do it as well as I can. That’s where my responsibility ends.

You may hate the work. Which is fine (and not unprecedented). You may ignore it, which is also fine. You may refuse to read/see anything else with my name on it and tell your friends and family to do the same. Additionally fine. You can do it silently, or you can let me know how much you hate my work. In either case, you’re fine. Those are your options, your responsibilities, as a member of the audience.

I wouldn’t ask anything more (or less) of you.

But I will still write, regardless.

Please stow all carry-on items and return your seats to their upright position.