Every now and then, one of your GetReligionistas reads a story — usually about a controversy tied to culture and morality — and then says, in his or her heart of hearts, “You know, religion ought to be in here somewhere.”
We think we sense the presence of a religion ghost and, of course, chasing those ghosts is what this weblog is all about.
So we write out post and then, on the comments pages, someone will say, “Why is this a GetReligion issue? There’s no religion in this story.”
And we say, “Well, there should be.”
And the reader then says, “Well, the story also doesn’t mention iced tea, moon rocks, polkas or the shocking rise in teens wearing flip-flops when it’s 35 degrees, and it could have (or similar arguments). In other words, the reader is asking: What does religion have to do with this kind of argument about culture and morality (and, often, sexuality)? What’s faith got to do with it?
We then say that, statistically speaking, we are dealing with subjects that tend to be linked to religious beliefs and traditions here in America. And so forth and so on.
So you have been warned: Here comes another GetReligion post about the Roman Polanski case. I think I saw a ghost in that stunning Los Angeles Times feature the other day by Joe Mozingo about the shocking contents of the original testimony by the victim, Samantha Gailey. The double-decker headline read:
How a girl’s stark words got lost in the Polanski spectacle
Samantha Gailey, at 13, was unequivocal in her testimony against Polanski. But her account was turned into something almost benign.
It’s a long, long story and, at times, almost impossible to read. You know you are in rough territory when a young girl tries to describe an explicit act of oral sex as “cuddliness.” All of the details are here, in large part because the story is trying to make the case that — for a variety of cultural reasons — people in Hollywood and elsewhere had motivations for making the blunt details go away.
So what did one of the world’s most respected movie directors — at least in high, elite circles — plead guilty to doing, kind of, before later trying to say that he didn’t really do what he was accused of doing, or it wasn’t really that bad because, yada, yada?
Along the way, various people would scrub the core allegations into something more benign — a probation officer would deem the crime a “spontaneous” act of “poor judgment,” a prison psychiatrist would call it “playful mutual eroticism.”
But Samantha’s stark testimony has never been seriously impugned, in or out of court. When she sued Polanski years later for sexual assault, he pleaded the 5th when asked if he illegally gave her champagne and part of a quaalude pill, then performed oral copulation on her and sodomized her.
An extensive review of several thousand court documents, as well as numerous interviews, shows a basic dynamic defining the entire saga — one force trying to drive debate away from a young girl’s unshaken allegations, and another trying to reel it back in.
So where is the ghost? Well, what are these two forces in this tug-of-war? Or what are the forces that helped shape the moral visions of the groups on both sides of this debate about Polanski and his history of seducing young girls?
After all, as Mozingo notes much later in the story, the European media could not understand what was going on. What about the private life of this young American siren who was causing trouble for this great artist?
The European media … went to Samantha’s school and house, talked to her friends, trying to learn more about the girl whose allegations threatened to bring down a veritable cult figure in Europe, where Polanski was not-so-secretly dating a 15-year-old girl, Nastassja Kinski, with no public outcry, no arrest. Samantha was cast as the temptress.
So, finally, we get to the passage in which I sensed the presence of a ghost, a passage worth sharing with GetReligion readers.
At a crucial moment, Polanski’s fate depended, in large part, on the recommendations of a probation officer named Irwin Gold. Would this case evolve into a mere public relations fiasco or would people, responding to Samantha’s stark testimony, keep talking about — gasp — jail?
The victim’s testimony kept getting “scrubbed” clean of the nasty details in report after report. Finally, Gold openly wrote about his admiration for Polanski and the degree to which the director had risen above the great tragedies in his life. And, of course, Polanski was a living symbol of Hollywood and its culture.
Gold wrote:
“Possibly not since Renaissance Italy has there been such a gathering of creative minds in one locale as there has been in Los Angeles County during the past half century. … While enriching the community with their presence, they have brought with them the manners and mores of their native lands which in rare instances have been at variance with those of their adoptive land.”
And there you have the two forces that keep colliding in the Polanski case.
Now, if you look at history and if you look at the statistics that define American life, would you say that religion plays a rather important role in defining the “manners and mores” of the “native land” that keeps causing grief for many elite artists in Hollywood? In terms of facts and statistics, what are some the most stark differences between Europe and America, when you are dealing with questions of morality and public life?
Just asking.
|
| Posted at 5:20 pm | Print
| Permalink | Trackback |
Comments (5) |







October 30, 2009, at 5:56 pm
This is not about sex, or morality at all. If Polanski drugged, and had sex with an 18 year old, that would have been a whole different story, and he might not be extradited. Also, he was only sentenced to 3 months in jail, which isn’t a lot for rape. I don’t think you can guarantee that you would get any less time for raping a 13 yr old in Europe. America is strict on crime in general. This does not have to do with sex. If you robbed, assaulted someone, or drank in public, you would still have the potential to be arrested. There are people like Robert Morrissey who got one year in prison for spray painting graffiti. You are confusing morality with authoritarian.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
October 30, 2009, at 6:07 pm
I think that the area of crime and religion such as this particular issue is vastly uncovered. For example, there was a recent horrendous rape case in Richmond California that caused me to ask the same question. I could not help wondering if the people involved had any professed religious beliefs.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
October 30, 2009, at 7:50 pm
Reading here of how the Hollywood and Europe ethos crowd embraced Polanski’s crime reminds me of the case of Gerry Studds the Congressman from here in Mass. who plied with alchohol and bedded down a young Congressional page and who never went to court over it (the teen-ager wouldn’t cooperate with prosecutors).
The local liberal media and Dem Party circled the wagons and Studds kept getting re-elected. This was a few decades ago. I still remember a radio interview with a New Bedford fisherman who brushed off Studds crime by saying that Studds was good to the fishing industry in Congress and that that was the only thing important to him.
There was a religion ghost here never reported on locally: the corruption of the morals of the voters in the district it took to re-elect Studds.
Like or Dislike:
1
0
October 31, 2009, at 8:49 am
If Hollywood celebrities commit or excuse crime, if Dem Party figures do the same, please do not blame “Europe” and its supposed ethos for it, 1) Europe is not filled with rape apologists, 2) Europeans can only comment based on the information they are given by the media. So if anyone, European correspondents bear the blame.
I also don’t think it appropriate to mix in Miss Kinski into this as she wasn’t raped. Basically this would again be reducing Mr Polanski’s deed to sex with a minor.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
November 1, 2009, at 10:50 am
Tmatt,
The other point I’d make to support yours is that the crime occurred in 1977, when the influence of Christianity was not so attenuated as today. Hollywood might have “moved on” from religious beliefs by then, but I don’t think any representative jury drawn from Los Angeles county would have.
Like or Dislike:
0
0