Hollywood’s Pursuit of a Dollar Is the Real Villain

In reading the Counterpunch response from Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.), I could not help but smile and shake my head (“TV Needs Self-Restraint, Not Censorship,” Counterpunch, June 30). Senator, don’t you realize that the beast is Hollywood and its inherent nature precludes it from any behavior that is not devoted to enhancing the net on the balance sheet? Show us how to profit from the conduct that you endorse, and brother, we’re yours!

*

Rather than beseeching restraint (we won’t foray into the realm of “good taste”) from this industry, you might as well pass your valuable time in more promising endeavors: i.e., requesting that Mike Tyson behave akin to something human when he next--as we know he will--enters the boxing ring. At least these exercises of one’s moral voice would have an attendant prospect of success prior to hell freezing over.

Senator, as a working actor of 20-plus years’ standing, I can assure you that a collective conscience from within this town is less likely to appear than Godot’s arrival. Functioning as part of the system for two decades has given me both proximity to and familiarity with the enemy. I’ve been here long enough to learn that Hollywood’s exclusive consideration is profit.

There is no need for advanced math skills here in media central--except of course as protection against the celebrated Hollywood penchant for “creative bookkeeping.” In our quest for product that evidences box-office “legs” (read, “that which may bring in an extra nickel”), we’ll scan the globe to put it on screen.

After all, if we don’t tell the sordid tale, someone else will. Can anyone possibly question the outlay of $60 million to bang Larry Flynt’s “triumph of the human spirit” into a theater near you?

Though many of us speak proudly about the joys of parenthood, as a group, we purveyors of discretion will never trouble ourselves with concerns about cultural impact or one’s obligation to safeguard impressionable young minds. Have we ever espoused the need for community parenting? Hey, Mrs. Clinton, we’ll happily kick in some funds for “the village,” but you damn sure better not expect us to reside within said province.

Everyone has a purpose in life, and ours is to chase the next buck--all the while insisting that our celluloid images are just a “reflection” of the chaotic world in which we live. Ours is a tradition rich in ennobling, and yet we resolutely refuse to behave in anything resembling a noble fashion. Hey, we only rarely intersect with the notion of responsible comportment, so how can we possibly aspire to the lofty heights of which our films hail the virtues? Senator, have you already forgotten the very public contradiction of Arnold’s Schwarzenegger’s “family values” Republican Party ticket tub-thumping and his mercenary passion for some of the most violent films in the history of cinema?

*

I could continue to gnaw at my own flesh, Sen. Lieberman, but my agent has just called with a very attractive opportunity for me to portray yet another homicidal lunatic. Unable to contain myself, I implore you toward a metaphorical “slap in the face.” Please, sir, I beg you to act in loco parentis. With a final, very foul, but not-yet-futile breath, I exhort you and your peers in Congress to save us before we consummate our mission of societal self-immolation.

BRIAN PATRICK CLARKE

Burbank