HOLLYWOOD & AIDS

As a writer and self-proclaimed freedom-of-expression defender, I was disappointed to read of how Hollywood is revising movie relationships in the wake of AIDS (“Is Hollywood Getting the Message About Safe Sex,?” by John M. Wilson, July 19).

It is not, I fear, social conscience dictating the changes in “morality,” but economic expediency. We’ve always heard that “sex sells,” but no one is sure what will sell now. So they’re playing it “safe” and it sounds like we’ll be getting more rose-colored lies, tacked-on marriage denouements and shots of the sky instead of honest portrayals of human sexuality and all the many possibilities between all kinds of humans.

Mainstream American movies are having trouble coping with AIDS and safe sex because they’ve never been able to show sex as clean, cautious, uninhibited, attractive, mutually enjoyable, egalitarian and fun all at the same time.

But it’s too late for us as human beings, artists, or audiences, to return “mystery.”

The mysteries to unlock now are those that motivate us to create of our deepest desires a heaven or hell. It is the examination of human motive that is artistically interesting to me.

Were American movies, books, TV shows, etc., able to portray discussions of sex without compunction, there would be no quandary about how to fit safe sex into the story line and still sell the popcorn.

The struggle of AIDS in the movies reflects the dilemma of sex in society as a whole.

We have all been caught between the promise of the liberation of the joy of sex and the threat of guilt, anxiety and fear that accompany it. In the shadows of the fun-sex stereotype lurks the sin-bearing stereotype ready to pounce.

Seeing another person as a person is not only a cliche, but also one of the most difficult challenges of our times.

PATRICK J. MURPHY

Corona