Morality Starts at Home, Not at a Movie Theater

In his commentary about morals, movies and censorship (“Should Movies Aspire to Moral High Ground?,” Aug. 22), Stephen Farber misses the point entirely and illustrates how frustrating this debate has become.

I have read and listened to countless discussions on this subject, all of which seem to come from one of two points of view, each of which centers on censorship of one sort or another.

Those who object to the violent, sexist or otherwise ugly images in movies tend to seek censorship, either by the industry itself or by legislation. People who side with Farber tend to argue against that sort of censorship by defending the right of artists to express themselves any way they see fit.

I agree that movies, music, television programs and all privately funded works of art must be protected against censorship without regard to their content. But I also agree with those who say that the content of a lot of current art, including popular film, feeds an ongoing moral decay in our culture.

This decay began many years ago, and people in my age group (40- to 60-year-olds) helped encourage it. What started out as a rebellion against suppression of artistic expression has mutated into an attitude that absolutely nothing can be judged morally, even within our own families. So we don’t question the right of anyone--even our own children--to see and hear whatever they want to see and hear, regardless of the harm it may cause.

My fiancee and I attended a screening of “The Cell” during its opening weekend. Though I can understand how reasonable people might have many strong, differing opinions about this film, I find it impossible to believe that any thinking adult could argue that it is appropriate fare for anyone under the age of 16, and maybe not even then. This is a film with images so twisted and horrific that only an adult with substantial life experience could even begin to comprehend their purpose.

And yet, as we sat in our seats waiting for “The Cell” to begin, we saw at least three families with small children enter the theater. Just three rows ahead of us, a mother, a father and two pre-kindergarten-age kids, a boy and a girl, settled into their seats; Mom fussed over them as Dad gently handed his son a small bag of popcorn as he excitedly settled in.

Looking at that young boy’s face, both before and especially after the film, made me cry. To think of that innocent young mind being subjected to such horror, in the presence of his parents, as if it were the most natural thing in the world to do, broke my heart into a million angry pieces.

We must realize that whatever moral problems exist in film or any other art form, the cultural problem and its solution rest in us and our own behavior. Something evil has happened to our culture when two loving parents can blithely assist in the mental and emotional thrashing of their own children, believing it’s no more unnatural to take them to see “The Cell” than “The Lion King.”

This is where the debate must focus, and it’s not easy, because to do so we cannot point our fingers at anyone other than ourselves. It is ignorant and dangerous to flaunt the 1st Amendment by censoring anything, even the awful stuff. It isn’t the role of the government or anyone else to protect us from moral decay. If it is to be stopped, we must be brave enough to stop blaming others and take responsibility for ourselves, our children and the world around us.

I wonder if we can.

*

Counterpunch is a weekly feature designed to let readers respond to reviews or stories about entertainment and the arts. Please send proposals to: Counterpunch, Calendar, Los Angeles Times, 202 W. 1st St., Los Angeles, CA 90012. Or fax: (213) 237-7630. Or e-mail: Counterpunch@latimes.com. Important: Include full name, address and phone number. Please do not exceed 600 words. We appreciate all proposals and regret that we cannot respond to each.