In recent
years, I’ve thought a lot about the media I choose to consume. I’ve been more
reluctant to support films with representation issues, such as whitewashing or cis
actors cast as trans characters. I always go into “Oscar mode” during award
season, trying to see as many of the nominated films that I can, but of late, I’ve
been more willing to decline to see a big nominee if I don’t like rumblings
I’ve heard about it from a social perspective (my completist nature was
overruled when it came to films like Green
Book or Three Billboards.) And of
course, there was the Harvey Weinstein scandal that kicked off a massive
reckoning for sexual predators in Hollywood and other industries – that last
point is what I’ll be focusing on primarily, although what I’m talking about can
apply to these other issues as well.
There are
different philosophies on what a consumer’s responsibility is when it comes to
things like this. There are those who say get rid of all of it, that paying
money to support those people and/or projects isn’t right, as well as those
who’ve genuinely lost all desire to see anything featuring certain people
(there are some who are like that for me – I can no longer see Kevin Spacey’s
face without thinking about his victims.) There are others who say older works
are fair game but don’t support anything new they make. There are those who say
it’s fine to separate an artist from their artwork, along with those who don’t
want the rest of the cast and crew to lose revenue due to the sins of one awful
person. I don’t think there are a lot of definitive answers about the “right”
way to respond in these situations (although I’ll admit my respect certainly
dwindles for actors who continue to eagerly make films with people like Roman
Polanski, especially A-listers who have the clout and resources to be choosy
about their projects.)
I
personally have responded in different ways to different people/projects. Some
actors I can no longer bear to watch (again, like Spacey,) and I don’t
particularly see that changing. But small roles in large ensembles often feel
grayer to me (Jeffrey Tambour in Girl,
Interrupted?), and I find I have a weak spot for my preferred franchises
(it grosses me out that Johnny Depp is playing Grindelwald, but I still saw the
last Fantastic Beasts movie in
theaters.) If I’m with friends or family and they don’t have an issue with it,
it can be harder for me to say no. And while there are certainly exceptions, I
tend not to have as strong a reaction when the predator in question was behind
the scenes (I don’t think I could go back at watch a film in which I
specifically know Harvey Weinstein
was harassing one of the actresses during the production, but he produced a ton
of movies during his career, some of which I love.) I’m inconsistent, is what
I’m saying. I try to make principled decisions, but I also know I make excuses
when I don’t want to stick to my guns for whatever reason.
Last year,
Pete Davidson did a bit about this topic on SNL,
looking specifically at his conflicting feelings of knowing R. Kelly is “a
monster” but still loving his music. Here’s the piece.
Davidson
admitted that “you don’t really know how good someone’s music is until you find
out they’re a pedophile” – he couldn’t really quit R. Kelly or Michael Jackson,
but he said, “If I found out Macklemore did some weird stuff, I’d be happy to
free up the space on my iPhone!” He went on to offer compromises between “cut
it all out 100%” and “keep listening with zero qualms,” suggesting that we
should pair consumption of problematic media with admissions of what their
creators did. He explained, “The full sentence should be, ‘Mark Walhberg beat
up an old Asian dude, and I would like one ticket to Daddy’s Home 3 please!’” I especially liked the idea he brought up
towards the end:
“Here’s my plan, and hopefully you guys like
it: any time any of us listen to a song or watch a movie made by an accused
serial predator, you have to give a dollar to charity that helps sexual assault
survivors. I’ve already donated $142, and that’s just from the ‘Ignition’ remix
alone!”
That
seemed like a reasonable solution to me. Rather than cut out everything I’d
prefer not to support or be disappointed in myself when I inevitably fail to
measure up, I could mitigate my viewing choices with an act of good.
I tweaked
the idea somewhat for my purposes, both because 1) I wanted to greater offset
the amount of any of my dollars that were profitting terrible people and 2) I
still wanted to make myself think before I decided whether or not something was
really worth watching. So, if my viewing actively adds to the wealth of someone
or something I don’t want to be supporting (ex: I buy a movie ticket/DVD, I
watch something on a streaming service,) I donate $10 to a relevant charity. If
my viewing doesn’t actively put money
in their pocket (ex: I rewatch a DVD I bought years ago, I rent something from
the library,) I donate $5.
Again,
I’m not saying this is the “right” answer and I try to avoid snap judgments of
people’s choices here, because I know this is a complex topic to navigate. However,
I’ve been doing this for a few months now, and I like how it’s working for me. It
takes some of the pressure off of me to always make the most considerate choice
while still giving me some accountability in what I do or don’t watch.
No comments:
Post a Comment