1 00:00:02,560 --> 00:00:04,480 Speaker 1: The night before my birthday this year, I had a 2 00:00:04,559 --> 00:00:07,080 Speaker 1: late flight home from Los Angeles. I arrived back in 3 00:00:07,080 --> 00:00:09,800 Speaker 1: Brooklyn and go to bed without seeing anyone. I sleep 4 00:00:09,920 --> 00:00:12,720 Speaker 1: late into the morning that I come downstairs, not having 5 00:00:12,720 --> 00:00:15,360 Speaker 1: seen my family in several days, and there's my wife 6 00:00:15,360 --> 00:00:17,919 Speaker 1: and my two year old daughter, so excited to wish 7 00:00:17,920 --> 00:00:20,599 Speaker 1: me a happy birthday and give me my gift. So 8 00:00:20,760 --> 00:00:24,320 Speaker 1: sweet to be reunited, and they bring out this giant box. 9 00:00:24,880 --> 00:00:27,000 Speaker 1: My wife has been talking about it for weeks. Would 10 00:00:27,040 --> 00:00:29,400 Speaker 1: the box arrive in time? She's been thinking about it 11 00:00:29,480 --> 00:00:33,199 Speaker 1: and worrying about it. It's the perfect gift. She's been 12 00:00:33,240 --> 00:00:35,040 Speaker 1: talking up how much I'm going to love it, and 13 00:00:35,080 --> 00:00:38,120 Speaker 1: how brilliant she is for coming up with the perfect present. 14 00:00:38,600 --> 00:00:43,160 Speaker 1: Very exciting build up. They give me this giant box 15 00:00:43,479 --> 00:00:47,240 Speaker 1: and I open it and it's a big, beautiful, fancy 16 00:00:47,520 --> 00:00:50,360 Speaker 1: framed photograph, something that looks like it should be in 17 00:00:50,400 --> 00:00:53,080 Speaker 1: a museum. It's of an old man in a black 18 00:00:53,120 --> 00:00:56,320 Speaker 1: suit with a giant black dog next to him. And 19 00:00:56,400 --> 00:01:00,320 Speaker 1: I look at it like, oh wow, this this is 20 00:01:01,040 --> 00:01:05,679 Speaker 1: really something, and my wife says, yeah, it's Billy Wilder. 21 00:01:06,080 --> 00:01:08,200 Speaker 1: I looked so hard for it. I found that at 22 00:01:08,240 --> 00:01:10,800 Speaker 1: this auction house, so incredible. I know he's your favorite. 23 00:01:10,800 --> 00:01:14,840 Speaker 1: How cool is that? And I don't quite know what 24 00:01:15,000 --> 00:01:20,760 Speaker 1: to say because this is not a photograph of Billy Wilder. 25 00:01:22,760 --> 00:01:23,560 Speaker 1: So I just sort of. 26 00:01:23,520 --> 00:01:26,760 Speaker 2: Say, oh my god, I've never quite seen him look 27 00:01:26,840 --> 00:01:30,119 Speaker 2: like this before. I didn't know he had a dog 28 00:01:30,319 --> 00:01:35,440 Speaker 2: like that, but then I had to, so I said, 29 00:01:35,840 --> 00:01:42,120 Speaker 2: but I'm not sure it's actually not This isn't Billy Wilder. 30 00:01:42,880 --> 00:01:47,600 Speaker 1: And my wife got so embarrassed. Really not a great scene. 31 00:01:47,760 --> 00:01:50,400 Speaker 1: She bought it from this auction house that labeled it 32 00:01:50,480 --> 00:01:54,680 Speaker 1: as Helman Newton photographing Billy Wilder. Later that afternoon, she 33 00:01:54,840 --> 00:01:57,400 Speaker 1: texts me from her office after doing some research, and 34 00:01:57,440 --> 00:02:00,800 Speaker 1: not only is it not Billy Wilder, it is a 35 00:02:00,840 --> 00:02:05,160 Speaker 1: photograph of Jean Marie Le Penn, the founder of France's 36 00:02:05,280 --> 00:02:08,799 Speaker 1: far right party, whom many consider to be a fascist. 37 00:02:09,720 --> 00:02:12,960 Speaker 1: So we now have a giant, beautiful, black and white 38 00:02:13,120 --> 00:02:16,440 Speaker 1: Helman Newton photograph of an anti semite in our home. 39 00:02:17,160 --> 00:02:23,359 Speaker 1: Happy birthday. I tell this story, of course, because role 40 00:02:23,440 --> 00:02:26,160 Speaker 1: Doll is and always has been part of the fabric 41 00:02:26,160 --> 00:02:29,160 Speaker 1: of my life. He helped shape my worldview, just like 42 00:02:29,240 --> 00:02:32,000 Speaker 1: Billy Wilder did. But it's hard to escape the feeling. 43 00:02:32,040 --> 00:02:34,839 Speaker 1: Now that there's been a bit of a mislabeling, it's 44 00:02:34,840 --> 00:02:37,640 Speaker 1: hard to see Doll as the sweet, creative hero I 45 00:02:37,639 --> 00:02:40,239 Speaker 1: want him to be, and instead I now sort of 46 00:02:40,280 --> 00:02:43,440 Speaker 1: see him as this darker figure. Can I square Doll's 47 00:02:43,560 --> 00:02:47,240 Speaker 1: much loved broken spine books scattered throughout our house with 48 00:02:47,280 --> 00:02:49,920 Speaker 1: the mezuza on our front door? Should I hide his 49 00:02:49,919 --> 00:02:52,320 Speaker 1: books like the Penn photo is hidden in the back 50 00:02:52,320 --> 00:02:55,280 Speaker 1: of our closet. I really don't know the answer, but 51 00:02:55,360 --> 00:03:01,880 Speaker 1: I want to. I really want to. For my hard podcast, 52 00:03:02,080 --> 00:03:06,160 Speaker 1: Imagine Entertainment and Parallax, I'm Aaron Tracy and this is 53 00:03:06,600 --> 00:03:14,440 Speaker 1: the Secret World of Roald Dahl episode eight. On our 54 00:03:14,520 --> 00:03:17,600 Speaker 1: last episode, Roxanne Gay suggested we speak to the author, 55 00:03:17,760 --> 00:03:21,359 Speaker 1: Claire Debtterer. Let's do that now. Claire has very different 56 00:03:21,400 --> 00:03:24,320 Speaker 1: feelings from Roxanne on the subject of separating the art 57 00:03:24,400 --> 00:03:28,200 Speaker 1: from the artist. Claire is a prolific writer whose work 58 00:03:28,200 --> 00:03:31,600 Speaker 1: has appeared in The Paris Review, The Atlantic, The Nation Vogue, 59 00:03:31,639 --> 00:03:34,840 Speaker 1: Marie Clare Entertainment Weekly, New York Magazine, you name it. 60 00:03:35,120 --> 00:03:38,720 Speaker 1: Her book Monsters a Fans Dilemma has become something like 61 00:03:38,760 --> 00:03:42,120 Speaker 1: a definitive text on this giant controversial issue that we're 62 00:03:42,160 --> 00:03:45,280 Speaker 1: all grappling with. It's brave, and it's honest, and it's 63 00:03:45,320 --> 00:03:48,480 Speaker 1: personal and it's really funny. In its rave review, The 64 00:03:48,520 --> 00:03:51,240 Speaker 1: New York Times wrote, this is a book that looks 65 00:03:51,280 --> 00:03:54,320 Speaker 1: boldly down the cliff at the roiling waters below, and 66 00:03:54,440 --> 00:03:58,160 Speaker 1: jumps right in, splashes around playfully, isn't afraid to get wet. 67 00:03:59,000 --> 00:04:01,200 Speaker 1: I started off by a skinclaire to tell us a 68 00:04:01,240 --> 00:04:02,480 Speaker 1: little bit about monsters. 69 00:04:03,000 --> 00:04:04,280 Speaker 3: I came to write this book. 70 00:04:04,280 --> 00:04:07,320 Speaker 4: I started it many years ago, in twenty fifteen or so, 71 00:04:07,640 --> 00:04:10,120 Speaker 4: because I'd been thinking and writing a lot about Roman 72 00:04:10,160 --> 00:04:13,600 Speaker 4: Polanski and I started my career as a film critic, 73 00:04:14,160 --> 00:04:17,120 Speaker 4: and Polanski's one of my top five filmmakers of all time. 74 00:04:17,160 --> 00:04:18,080 Speaker 3: I love his work. 75 00:04:18,240 --> 00:04:20,479 Speaker 4: I was researching him for a previous book where I 76 00:04:20,560 --> 00:04:24,440 Speaker 4: was writing about predation of young girls in the nineteen seventies, 77 00:04:24,520 --> 00:04:27,719 Speaker 4: and so Polanski came into that story, and I, you know, 78 00:04:27,760 --> 00:04:31,240 Speaker 4: I really began to learn a lot about what had 79 00:04:31,279 --> 00:04:35,800 Speaker 4: happened in his not even just alleged rape of Samantha 80 00:04:35,839 --> 00:04:39,840 Speaker 4: Gaily or Samantha Geimer as she's sometimes known. I read depositions, 81 00:04:40,000 --> 00:04:42,760 Speaker 4: I read a lot on the subject, and when I 82 00:04:42,800 --> 00:04:46,280 Speaker 4: finished reading, I found, to my surprise that I could 83 00:04:46,279 --> 00:04:49,880 Speaker 4: still watch the films, and this seemed hugely interesting to me, 84 00:04:50,240 --> 00:04:53,120 Speaker 4: that there was something happening here that was complex and 85 00:04:53,560 --> 00:04:58,080 Speaker 4: sort of upsetting. And I began to think about this problem, 86 00:04:58,160 --> 00:05:00,880 Speaker 4: and in early moments of writing, I was just sort 87 00:05:00,880 --> 00:05:02,680 Speaker 4: of looking for someone to tell me what to do, 88 00:05:03,120 --> 00:05:05,680 Speaker 4: which now is a dynamic I'm very familiar with as 89 00:05:05,760 --> 00:05:07,560 Speaker 4: the author of this book. People just want me to 90 00:05:07,600 --> 00:05:11,360 Speaker 4: tell them what to do. The book is not That's 91 00:05:11,400 --> 00:05:13,680 Speaker 4: not really what it's trying to do. What it's trying 92 00:05:13,720 --> 00:05:16,520 Speaker 4: to do more is look at what was happening to 93 00:05:16,520 --> 00:05:18,920 Speaker 4: me in that moment when I was consuming the Polanski 94 00:05:19,000 --> 00:05:22,800 Speaker 4: films knowing what I know. It was talking about what's 95 00:05:22,839 --> 00:05:25,760 Speaker 4: occurring there, what happens to the audience member? Is the 96 00:05:25,960 --> 00:05:30,920 Speaker 4: art changed? Is there something immoral in that moment? Does 97 00:05:30,960 --> 00:05:35,120 Speaker 4: it matter? I was trying to be descriptive of the problem. 98 00:05:35,440 --> 00:05:38,960 Speaker 4: This is what it's like to consume work knowing what 99 00:05:39,000 --> 00:05:41,479 Speaker 4: we know. You know, I do have some ideas of 100 00:05:41,480 --> 00:05:44,520 Speaker 4: what people could or might do, but the book is 101 00:05:44,600 --> 00:05:48,360 Speaker 4: more interested in how we live through this problem. 102 00:05:49,120 --> 00:05:51,920 Speaker 1: I'm curious, is there a difference in your mind between 103 00:05:52,600 --> 00:05:56,240 Speaker 1: consuming the work of artists who committed crimes against people 104 00:05:56,680 --> 00:06:00,400 Speaker 1: versus those who just said big into things. Doll was 105 00:06:00,400 --> 00:06:02,840 Speaker 1: a bit of a jerk to the people who are 106 00:06:02,880 --> 00:06:06,000 Speaker 1: closest to him, but he's not accused of any sort 107 00:06:06,040 --> 00:06:09,360 Speaker 1: of actual physical abuse like so many of these artist 108 00:06:09,440 --> 00:06:12,839 Speaker 1: monsters are. His crimes were what he said. Do you 109 00:06:12,839 --> 00:06:14,320 Speaker 1: think that there's a difference there. 110 00:06:14,760 --> 00:06:17,320 Speaker 4: I don't mean to be Yoda like or KG, but 111 00:06:17,640 --> 00:06:21,159 Speaker 4: I think that it's interesting that your question cites the 112 00:06:21,240 --> 00:06:25,240 Speaker 4: answer to the problem in the nuances or differences in 113 00:06:25,279 --> 00:06:28,200 Speaker 4: the behavior of the artist alone. And I guess what's 114 00:06:28,240 --> 00:06:31,640 Speaker 4: most interesting to me is the audience member. This is 115 00:06:31,680 --> 00:06:34,279 Speaker 4: really the nexus from which I look at this problem. 116 00:06:34,640 --> 00:06:37,960 Speaker 4: I guess the question is who are you? Who is 117 00:06:38,000 --> 00:06:40,640 Speaker 4: the person who's consuming the art? You know, the person 118 00:06:40,680 --> 00:06:45,440 Speaker 4: who's able to withstand their knowledge of someone's biographical shittiness. 119 00:06:45,760 --> 00:06:49,359 Speaker 4: It's largely dependent on their own life experience, you know. 120 00:06:49,440 --> 00:06:51,680 Speaker 4: So you have the biography of the maker, but then 121 00:06:51,680 --> 00:06:54,720 Speaker 4: you also have the biography of the audience member. I 122 00:06:54,760 --> 00:06:58,839 Speaker 4: think that somebody's experience of Doll's anti Semitism, for instance, 123 00:06:59,120 --> 00:07:02,560 Speaker 4: might be coming to that work with their own experiences 124 00:07:02,600 --> 00:07:05,360 Speaker 4: of that. We can't just sort of make these kind 125 00:07:05,360 --> 00:07:09,039 Speaker 4: of universal or hard and fast rules about what could 126 00:07:09,120 --> 00:07:12,480 Speaker 4: or could not be consumed based just on the artist's behavior. 127 00:07:12,600 --> 00:07:15,400 Speaker 4: It really, to me comes back to the subjective, lived 128 00:07:15,400 --> 00:07:17,000 Speaker 4: experience of the audience member. 129 00:07:17,200 --> 00:07:19,480 Speaker 1: Certainly everyone could make the choice for themselves whether they 130 00:07:20,000 --> 00:07:22,440 Speaker 1: want to consume this work or not. But with Doll, 131 00:07:22,600 --> 00:07:25,200 Speaker 1: I think there's that added wrinkle of what about kids, 132 00:07:25,360 --> 00:07:27,960 Speaker 1: because it's not their choice right what I read to them. 133 00:07:28,320 --> 00:07:30,200 Speaker 1: As my kids grow up, I am of course terrified 134 00:07:30,200 --> 00:07:32,040 Speaker 1: that they're going to be subject to any sort of 135 00:07:32,040 --> 00:07:35,000 Speaker 1: anti Semitism or bigotry of any kind. But here I 136 00:07:35,040 --> 00:07:39,200 Speaker 1: am happily giving them Roll Doll's books. And I'm curious 137 00:07:39,200 --> 00:07:40,320 Speaker 1: if you have any thoughts about that. 138 00:07:40,480 --> 00:07:42,680 Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, I think this really has come to 139 00:07:42,760 --> 00:07:46,160 Speaker 4: the four. Also with Rolling, what do we do about JK? 140 00:07:46,280 --> 00:07:48,600 Speaker 3: Rowling? Do we give her books to our kids? 141 00:07:49,040 --> 00:07:52,400 Speaker 4: And it's different because she's alive and very much doubling 142 00:07:52,440 --> 00:07:56,440 Speaker 4: down right, She's saying what she's saying, And it's a 143 00:07:56,560 --> 00:07:59,960 Speaker 4: very interesting and complex dynamic there. With Doll, you have 144 00:08:00,080 --> 00:08:04,400 Speaker 4: someone who's dead where there's not this ongoing connection to 145 00:08:04,440 --> 00:08:05,240 Speaker 4: the horrible things. 146 00:08:05,240 --> 00:08:05,720 Speaker 3: He said. 147 00:08:06,120 --> 00:08:09,120 Speaker 4: This question is interesting because it's almost like when I 148 00:08:09,160 --> 00:08:13,000 Speaker 4: think about this problem, I think about individual responses and 149 00:08:13,080 --> 00:08:16,520 Speaker 4: institutional responses. Will I watch a Polanski film? 150 00:08:16,760 --> 00:08:17,000 Speaker 3: Yes? 151 00:08:17,480 --> 00:08:20,920 Speaker 4: Would I program or curate a series of Polanski films 152 00:08:20,920 --> 00:08:24,360 Speaker 4: at my local art museum? More complex if my local 153 00:08:24,480 --> 00:08:26,600 Speaker 4: art museum were to do that on its own, would 154 00:08:26,600 --> 00:08:29,480 Speaker 4: I hope that they would acknowledge some of the complexities 155 00:08:29,560 --> 00:08:30,440 Speaker 4: of the biography? 156 00:08:30,800 --> 00:08:31,080 Speaker 3: Also? 157 00:08:31,200 --> 00:08:34,360 Speaker 4: Yes, in your role as a parent, in a sense, 158 00:08:34,800 --> 00:08:39,679 Speaker 4: you're an institution. There's pedagogy involved, There's the person is 159 00:08:40,000 --> 00:08:44,040 Speaker 4: can't escape the roof that they're under. So you have 160 00:08:44,360 --> 00:08:47,600 Speaker 4: different pressures on you as an institution than you do 161 00:08:47,760 --> 00:08:51,080 Speaker 4: as a single person who's making his own decisions about 162 00:08:51,080 --> 00:08:53,680 Speaker 4: whether or not to consume the art. So I guess 163 00:08:53,760 --> 00:08:55,600 Speaker 4: you just have to ask yourself what kind of institution 164 00:08:55,720 --> 00:08:57,040 Speaker 4: do you want to be and what is it that 165 00:08:57,160 --> 00:08:59,240 Speaker 4: you're saying to your kids. I mean, I don't know 166 00:08:59,240 --> 00:09:02,200 Speaker 4: how old your kids are, but I do think there's 167 00:09:02,200 --> 00:09:04,840 Speaker 4: a sense in which if you're going to consume this work, 168 00:09:05,080 --> 00:09:06,960 Speaker 4: you can also talk to your kids about what's going on. 169 00:09:07,080 --> 00:09:09,760 Speaker 4: Maybe not when they're four, but maybe when they're ten. 170 00:09:10,240 --> 00:09:13,600 Speaker 4: Kids can handle all kinds of complex discussions. Part of 171 00:09:13,679 --> 00:09:18,120 Speaker 4: the issue around This is this debate over levels of complexity. 172 00:09:18,600 --> 00:09:21,679 Speaker 4: How much should people know? How much should they have 173 00:09:21,720 --> 00:09:25,520 Speaker 4: to have to know? Is it somehow a disruption of 174 00:09:25,559 --> 00:09:28,920 Speaker 4: some kind of innocence to share information with people, which 175 00:09:28,960 --> 00:09:30,199 Speaker 4: is the institutional question? 176 00:09:30,559 --> 00:09:31,840 Speaker 1: Yeah, I think that. 177 00:09:32,040 --> 00:09:36,520 Speaker 4: For me, the reason this question is so pressing is 178 00:09:36,760 --> 00:09:39,679 Speaker 4: the way in which there is no escape from that biography. 179 00:09:39,960 --> 00:09:42,760 Speaker 4: The biography is what's happening to us all the time. 180 00:09:42,880 --> 00:09:46,040 Speaker 4: We can't not know. I'm fifty eight. When I was young, 181 00:09:46,320 --> 00:09:49,640 Speaker 4: it was very difficult to find out biographical information about artists, 182 00:09:49,760 --> 00:09:53,280 Speaker 4: certainly about pop artists or current pop culture figures. It 183 00:09:53,360 --> 00:09:56,520 Speaker 4: was really incumbent on the audience member. And now biography 184 00:09:56,600 --> 00:10:00,000 Speaker 4: happens to us as audience members for all of these 185 00:10:00,040 --> 00:10:03,200 Speaker 4: different cultural reasons. But the reason it's really happening is 186 00:10:03,240 --> 00:10:08,720 Speaker 4: because social media is built upon biography. Your biography, my biography. 187 00:10:09,240 --> 00:10:11,840 Speaker 4: That's what it's made out of, his people's stories. So 188 00:10:12,320 --> 00:10:15,080 Speaker 4: we learn this biographical information whether we want to or not. 189 00:10:15,280 --> 00:10:17,400 Speaker 4: Like to me, it seems like a real nicety to ask, 190 00:10:17,440 --> 00:10:19,800 Speaker 4: do I need to go find this biographical information to 191 00:10:19,840 --> 00:10:23,000 Speaker 4: share with my students, because in most cases, the biographical 192 00:10:23,000 --> 00:10:26,760 Speaker 4: information is preceding the work almost always. Now you know, 193 00:10:26,800 --> 00:10:29,200 Speaker 4: this is a question for the ages, But the reason 194 00:10:29,240 --> 00:10:32,600 Speaker 4: that this moment is special or unique is because of 195 00:10:32,679 --> 00:10:35,560 Speaker 4: this way biography is out there running the show. 196 00:10:38,720 --> 00:10:42,560 Speaker 1: Something else I grapple with is when the artist chooses 197 00:10:42,600 --> 00:10:48,160 Speaker 1: to apologize with Doll he was absolutely unrepentant, but it's 198 00:10:48,200 --> 00:10:51,800 Speaker 1: so tracked. He called himself an anti Semite and had 199 00:10:51,920 --> 00:10:55,160 Speaker 1: he was totally fine with that. But a few years ago, 200 00:10:55,600 --> 00:10:59,320 Speaker 1: right before, right around the same time that Netflix bought 201 00:10:59,640 --> 00:11:02,280 Speaker 1: The Doll State for an incredible amount of money to 202 00:11:02,360 --> 00:11:06,720 Speaker 1: turn those stories into films, the Doll State issued an 203 00:11:06,720 --> 00:11:10,640 Speaker 1: official apology for his anti semitism. So I guess I'm 204 00:11:10,640 --> 00:11:12,560 Speaker 1: trying to decide if that should make a bit of 205 00:11:12,559 --> 00:11:13,440 Speaker 1: difference from me or not. 206 00:11:13,920 --> 00:11:15,720 Speaker 3: That's interesting. I like how you just said that. 207 00:11:15,800 --> 00:11:17,600 Speaker 4: You know, you're trying to figure out how you feel 208 00:11:17,640 --> 00:11:20,800 Speaker 4: about it and how you feel about as a Jewish family, 209 00:11:20,920 --> 00:11:21,719 Speaker 4: how you're going to. 210 00:11:21,679 --> 00:11:22,920 Speaker 3: Relate to that apology. 211 00:11:22,960 --> 00:11:26,920 Speaker 4: And the Wagner Festival went through a similar thing where 212 00:11:26,920 --> 00:11:31,080 Speaker 4: there was some reckoning and I think one family member apologized. 213 00:11:31,559 --> 00:11:33,120 Speaker 4: I'm not sure where they are with that. I haven't 214 00:11:33,160 --> 00:11:36,319 Speaker 4: doune research on it. In a few years. I think 215 00:11:36,640 --> 00:11:40,360 Speaker 4: that to me, we can't change what Dall said, we 216 00:11:40,400 --> 00:11:44,319 Speaker 4: can't change who Wagner was. But I think the a 217 00:11:44,400 --> 00:11:48,960 Speaker 4: state or the institutional drive to apologize is actually meaningful. 218 00:11:49,200 --> 00:11:52,880 Speaker 4: I think that apology, which is a little different from remorse, 219 00:11:53,000 --> 00:11:56,840 Speaker 4: but I think apology, within the context of the conversations 220 00:11:56,840 --> 00:12:00,199 Speaker 4: we're having is actually quite rare. It's not something people 221 00:12:00,240 --> 00:12:02,360 Speaker 4: do a lot of. There's a lot of lack of 222 00:12:02,400 --> 00:12:05,800 Speaker 4: repentance across the board around these issues, and I think 223 00:12:05,840 --> 00:12:09,040 Speaker 4: that every apology begets more apologies. 224 00:12:09,080 --> 00:12:11,839 Speaker 3: One hopes that it creates this idea that we. 225 00:12:11,960 --> 00:12:17,120 Speaker 4: Can acknowledge that wrong was done, and that has both emotional, 226 00:12:17,679 --> 00:12:21,080 Speaker 4: maybe even aesthetic, and certainly legal meaning. I sort of 227 00:12:21,160 --> 00:12:24,600 Speaker 4: treasure every apology because they are so rare and because 228 00:12:24,600 --> 00:12:27,520 Speaker 4: they remind us that it can be done. So one 229 00:12:27,600 --> 00:12:29,680 Speaker 4: of the things I'm thinking about a lot in the 230 00:12:29,720 --> 00:12:33,679 Speaker 4: book is I really grapple throughout the writing of the 231 00:12:33,720 --> 00:12:37,000 Speaker 4: book with should a person be written off or lost 232 00:12:37,040 --> 00:12:40,000 Speaker 4: for having done a rotten thing or said a rotten thing? 233 00:12:40,520 --> 00:12:43,400 Speaker 4: What is it to take responsibility for the crummy things 234 00:12:43,440 --> 00:12:46,480 Speaker 4: we've done. Part Way through the book, I'm dealing with 235 00:12:46,520 --> 00:12:50,960 Speaker 4: my own sobriety and becoming sober sort of creates this 236 00:12:51,679 --> 00:12:55,200 Speaker 4: necessity for an acknowledgment that you've done something wrong, because 237 00:12:55,240 --> 00:12:57,920 Speaker 4: if you hadn't done something wrong, you wouldn't quit drinking, right, 238 00:12:58,720 --> 00:13:01,800 Speaker 4: One's own monstrosity is kind of baked into the act 239 00:13:01,840 --> 00:13:02,640 Speaker 4: of becoming sober. 240 00:13:02,920 --> 00:13:04,679 Speaker 3: What is your life after that? 241 00:13:04,880 --> 00:13:08,000 Speaker 4: What is it to be a person after that acknowledgment? 242 00:13:08,160 --> 00:13:11,880 Speaker 4: And that question I think aligns me with people who've 243 00:13:11,880 --> 00:13:14,600 Speaker 4: done something crummy, right, and what is it to be 244 00:13:14,679 --> 00:13:15,240 Speaker 4: human in. 245 00:13:15,160 --> 00:13:17,760 Speaker 3: The face of that? So people do get. 246 00:13:17,640 --> 00:13:21,480 Speaker 4: In my opinion, they do get to change or get better. 247 00:13:21,480 --> 00:13:23,680 Speaker 4: And it's a little different within a state. But I 248 00:13:23,720 --> 00:13:27,640 Speaker 4: think apology and remorse are such powerful tools, and if 249 00:13:27,679 --> 00:13:31,560 Speaker 4: we don't take them in some kind of good faith, 250 00:13:31,760 --> 00:13:34,280 Speaker 4: we start to make them even more extinct than they 251 00:13:34,280 --> 00:13:34,880 Speaker 4: already are. 252 00:13:35,440 --> 00:13:37,640 Speaker 1: Yeah, it's so hard to think of any especially in 253 00:13:37,679 --> 00:13:41,679 Speaker 1: today's climate. I'm just thinking about Kanye West, track, Kyle Hitler. 254 00:13:42,960 --> 00:13:44,880 Speaker 1: I mean, so many of these guys are just so unrepentant. 255 00:13:45,080 --> 00:13:47,760 Speaker 4: Yeah, And like, if Kanye were to make an apology now, 256 00:13:48,080 --> 00:13:51,520 Speaker 4: would that be meaningful? Probably not, because it has been 257 00:13:51,559 --> 00:13:55,480 Speaker 4: so unrepentant. The performance of his own hatefulness has been 258 00:13:55,600 --> 00:13:58,840 Speaker 4: so ongoing and so relentless that apology would just be 259 00:13:58,880 --> 00:14:02,520 Speaker 4: another performance. But there are context in which it's meaningful, 260 00:14:02,559 --> 00:14:02,800 Speaker 4: I think. 261 00:14:02,880 --> 00:14:05,800 Speaker 1: Yeah, I read your piece in Paris Review about Woody 262 00:14:05,840 --> 00:14:07,719 Speaker 1: Allen this morning, and it seems like one of the 263 00:14:07,760 --> 00:14:09,480 Speaker 1: things that bothered you so much was when he said 264 00:14:09,760 --> 00:14:12,199 Speaker 1: the heart that's what the heart wants. That's his justification, 265 00:14:12,440 --> 00:14:14,680 Speaker 1: which is the polar opposite of an apology. 266 00:14:14,880 --> 00:14:16,720 Speaker 3: Oh, I love that. I'd never thought of it that later. 267 00:14:17,200 --> 00:14:20,000 Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah, I did try to title the book the 268 00:14:20,040 --> 00:14:22,080 Speaker 4: Heart Wants what it wants, and my editor just laughed 269 00:14:22,080 --> 00:14:22,760 Speaker 4: me out of the room. 270 00:14:23,560 --> 00:14:24,440 Speaker 5: I'm not calling it that. 271 00:14:25,280 --> 00:14:27,560 Speaker 1: Something that I certainly think about a lot is whether 272 00:14:27,680 --> 00:14:31,720 Speaker 1: or not the artists personal beliefs or prejudices infects their work, 273 00:14:31,960 --> 00:14:34,080 Speaker 1: And with someone that grow and Polanski, I'm not sure 274 00:14:34,120 --> 00:14:36,240 Speaker 1: I see it, which maybe is why it's easier to 275 00:14:36,280 --> 00:14:40,640 Speaker 1: watch those movies with Doll. It's complicated. Some people certainly 276 00:14:40,640 --> 00:14:42,600 Speaker 1: do make the case that there are figures in the 277 00:14:42,640 --> 00:14:46,320 Speaker 1: Witches that can be construed as antismitic tropes. I don't 278 00:14:46,320 --> 00:14:48,360 Speaker 1: know how I feel about that, but I don't really 279 00:14:48,400 --> 00:14:52,040 Speaker 1: see his anti semitism in his work, so that becomes 280 00:14:52,200 --> 00:14:52,920 Speaker 1: much easier for me. 281 00:14:53,560 --> 00:14:56,040 Speaker 4: Yeah, I think that there's a kind of an interesting 282 00:14:56,200 --> 00:14:58,240 Speaker 4: lineup of the way these things work. I think you 283 00:14:58,320 --> 00:15:02,880 Speaker 4: have someone like What where the thing that people perceive 284 00:15:02,920 --> 00:15:06,000 Speaker 4: as objectionable is so inherent in the work when you 285 00:15:06,040 --> 00:15:09,880 Speaker 4: watch Manhattan and the way that young women are presented 286 00:15:09,920 --> 00:15:12,400 Speaker 4: and used in his films. So that's a place where 287 00:15:12,440 --> 00:15:15,120 Speaker 4: the biography and the work are really close together, and 288 00:15:15,160 --> 00:15:17,480 Speaker 4: that's disturbing in that way. And then you have, you know, 289 00:15:17,560 --> 00:15:21,920 Speaker 4: something like Cosby, where there's such an incredible chasm between 290 00:15:21,960 --> 00:15:25,520 Speaker 4: doctor Huxtable and what he is said to have done 291 00:15:25,800 --> 00:15:27,960 Speaker 4: that that makes the work sort of upsetting in a 292 00:15:28,000 --> 00:15:31,360 Speaker 4: different way. And so I think that Doll is fascinating 293 00:15:31,400 --> 00:15:35,920 Speaker 4: because there is a sense that he is somehow uniquely 294 00:15:36,040 --> 00:15:40,200 Speaker 4: tapped into what makes a person ugly in their heart, 295 00:15:40,400 --> 00:15:43,200 Speaker 4: and he's found a way to express that through these 296 00:15:43,240 --> 00:15:46,160 Speaker 4: different characters. Sometimes a minor character is in a book, 297 00:15:46,200 --> 00:15:49,720 Speaker 4: sometimes a more major character, and that is always fascinating. 298 00:15:49,800 --> 00:15:53,400 Speaker 4: When somebody has this darkness inside them, or has this 299 00:15:53,600 --> 00:15:54,840 Speaker 4: dark quality. 300 00:15:54,480 --> 00:15:56,640 Speaker 3: And then they express it through character. 301 00:15:56,720 --> 00:15:59,440 Speaker 4: It does make it more confusing, because on some level, 302 00:15:59,720 --> 00:16:04,800 Speaker 4: the ridiculousness of being a person who's against others is 303 00:16:04,840 --> 00:16:08,480 Speaker 4: expressed in his work. There's a periodic funny element to 304 00:16:08,520 --> 00:16:12,000 Speaker 4: some of these characters. And yet did he see himself 305 00:16:12,320 --> 00:16:15,520 Speaker 4: as a comic figure because he had this hate that 306 00:16:15,600 --> 00:16:16,840 Speaker 4: he was living inside of. 307 00:16:17,080 --> 00:16:18,000 Speaker 5: I think probably not. 308 00:16:19,200 --> 00:16:23,720 Speaker 4: I think there's something about authors who write work for 309 00:16:23,840 --> 00:16:27,120 Speaker 4: children that has really withstood the test of time, and 310 00:16:27,240 --> 00:16:30,680 Speaker 4: certainly that is work that I had a relationship when 311 00:16:30,720 --> 00:16:32,760 Speaker 4: I was young. You know that there is some part 312 00:16:33,320 --> 00:16:36,800 Speaker 4: of the landscape of My Psyche that belongs to Roldahl, 313 00:16:37,320 --> 00:16:39,680 Speaker 4: just as there is the part of the landscape of 314 00:16:39,680 --> 00:16:42,360 Speaker 4: My Psyche belongs to Laura Ingles Wilder, and she has 315 00:16:42,400 --> 00:16:43,359 Speaker 4: her own problems. 316 00:16:43,520 --> 00:16:46,080 Speaker 3: And I would say that when that's. 317 00:16:45,880 --> 00:16:50,200 Speaker 4: Your experience and you learn these pieces of biographical information, 318 00:16:50,680 --> 00:16:54,280 Speaker 4: there is this sadness that comes with it. It's a very 319 00:16:54,320 --> 00:16:58,120 Speaker 4: specific sadness, and I think it's a sadness that cries 320 00:16:58,240 --> 00:17:02,320 Speaker 4: out to be discussed, that needs to be acknowledged and 321 00:17:02,480 --> 00:17:06,600 Speaker 4: talk about, needs to be taken apart and looked at. 322 00:17:06,880 --> 00:17:09,359 Speaker 4: We need to ask why does this sadness exist? And 323 00:17:09,520 --> 00:17:14,719 Speaker 4: too often in this discussion, I feel like it's too absolute, 324 00:17:14,880 --> 00:17:17,919 Speaker 4: and there's either somebody saying you should absolutely throw out 325 00:17:17,960 --> 00:17:21,000 Speaker 4: the books, or there's somebody saying these things are separate 326 00:17:21,160 --> 00:17:24,520 Speaker 4: and we don't care and you shouldn't care. But what's 327 00:17:24,560 --> 00:17:27,159 Speaker 4: most interesting to me is the fact that most of 328 00:17:27,240 --> 00:17:30,320 Speaker 4: us live in the middle. And I think that we 329 00:17:30,480 --> 00:17:34,160 Speaker 4: actually are helping each other. If we can say this 330 00:17:34,240 --> 00:17:38,600 Speaker 4: is a bummer and yet the work is meaningful, that 331 00:17:38,800 --> 00:17:41,160 Speaker 4: is reality. And I think when we talk about that, 332 00:17:41,200 --> 00:17:45,040 Speaker 4: we're living in reality rather than in some fantasyland where 333 00:17:45,080 --> 00:17:48,640 Speaker 4: the work must be separated, or some other fantasyland where 334 00:17:48,680 --> 00:17:52,640 Speaker 4: the work doesn't have meaning or cultural valance, which. 335 00:17:52,400 --> 00:17:54,040 Speaker 3: It does thing. 336 00:17:54,119 --> 00:17:57,840 Speaker 4: I mean, I'm just always really interested in acknowledging that 337 00:17:58,200 --> 00:18:03,600 Speaker 4: our responses to this biographical information are emotional. And I 338 00:18:03,760 --> 00:18:08,080 Speaker 4: feel like so often when we're supposedly having these ethical 339 00:18:08,119 --> 00:18:11,880 Speaker 4: conversations around these issues and people are defending their point 340 00:18:11,880 --> 00:18:14,359 Speaker 4: of view, what's really happening is they're having a feeling. 341 00:18:14,880 --> 00:18:17,919 Speaker 4: This is art where audience members, we are deep in 342 00:18:17,960 --> 00:18:21,480 Speaker 4: our own subjectivity. The art is giving us an emotional response. 343 00:18:21,520 --> 00:18:25,040 Speaker 4: Sow's the biographical element. If we can acknowledge that's what's happening, 344 00:18:25,080 --> 00:18:26,200 Speaker 4: I think we can get a lot farther. 345 00:18:26,880 --> 00:18:29,520 Speaker 1: That was the great Claire Denner, author of Monsters a 346 00:18:29,600 --> 00:18:32,920 Speaker 1: fans Saba after the break, we'll talk to someone who 347 00:18:32,920 --> 00:18:39,679 Speaker 1: sees the issue a little differently. Eric catall Mathis is 348 00:18:39,720 --> 00:18:42,560 Speaker 1: the chair of the philosophy department at Wellesley College. He 349 00:18:42,600 --> 00:18:45,080 Speaker 1: wrote a book called Drawing the Line What to do 350 00:18:45,160 --> 00:18:48,080 Speaker 1: with the work of immoral artists From museums to the movies. 351 00:18:48,480 --> 00:18:50,880 Speaker 1: It's all about what to do, think, and feel when 352 00:18:51,000 --> 00:18:54,200 Speaker 1: artists that we love do terrible things. I started off 353 00:18:54,200 --> 00:18:56,240 Speaker 1: by asking him the obvious question. 354 00:18:56,680 --> 00:18:59,480 Speaker 5: So can we separate the art from the artists? Is 355 00:18:59,680 --> 00:19:03,560 Speaker 5: a question that really dominates the space. But I think 356 00:19:03,600 --> 00:19:07,000 Speaker 5: it's largely the wrong question. I'm not sure it really 357 00:19:07,040 --> 00:19:09,879 Speaker 5: matters whether we can separate the art from the artist 358 00:19:09,960 --> 00:19:12,479 Speaker 5: often because the question we should be asking is should 359 00:19:12,480 --> 00:19:15,879 Speaker 5: we separate the art from the artist? And when I 360 00:19:15,880 --> 00:19:18,159 Speaker 5: say should we separate the art from the artist, what 361 00:19:18,200 --> 00:19:21,119 Speaker 5: I mean is that we should be taking seriously what 362 00:19:21,200 --> 00:19:24,359 Speaker 5: we know about the moral life of the artist and 363 00:19:24,400 --> 00:19:28,199 Speaker 5: then asking the question every time, how should what we 364 00:19:28,280 --> 00:19:31,080 Speaker 5: know about the moral life of the artist factor into 365 00:19:31,200 --> 00:19:35,320 Speaker 5: my art consumption, or how I'm engaging with this art 366 00:19:35,359 --> 00:19:39,200 Speaker 5: in public, or how I'm thinking about introducing my kid 367 00:19:39,320 --> 00:19:42,240 Speaker 5: to this art, or broader policy decisions that we make 368 00:19:42,240 --> 00:19:44,879 Speaker 5: about the arts so I think it's essential that the 369 00:19:45,200 --> 00:19:48,760 Speaker 5: question about the relationship between the moral life of the 370 00:19:48,840 --> 00:19:52,480 Speaker 5: artist and their artwork remain a live question in all 371 00:19:52,520 --> 00:19:55,880 Speaker 5: of these different contexts, one that we need to think 372 00:19:55,920 --> 00:19:58,240 Speaker 5: about in those contexts and figure out how to answer. 373 00:19:58,440 --> 00:20:01,440 Speaker 5: But when we try to separate, when we say can 374 00:20:01,480 --> 00:20:03,800 Speaker 5: we separate the art from the artist? My worry about 375 00:20:03,840 --> 00:20:06,360 Speaker 5: that is it's often an attempt to say, like, well, 376 00:20:06,400 --> 00:20:09,000 Speaker 5: if we can, then we can sort of prise them 377 00:20:09,040 --> 00:20:13,200 Speaker 5: apart and not be faced with this question, how should 378 00:20:13,240 --> 00:20:15,600 Speaker 5: we engage with the moral life of artists? And that 379 00:20:15,680 --> 00:20:17,439 Speaker 5: concerns me right. I think that's the question that we 380 00:20:17,440 --> 00:20:21,720 Speaker 5: should always be thinking about. And sometimes the answer will 381 00:20:21,760 --> 00:20:24,200 Speaker 5: be that the moral life of the artist isn't particularly 382 00:20:24,280 --> 00:20:27,280 Speaker 5: relevant in this context. That's certainly a possibility, and that 383 00:20:27,320 --> 00:20:30,240 Speaker 5: will happen in all kinds of different situations, but will 384 00:20:30,280 --> 00:20:32,800 Speaker 5: have at least asked that question, that question will be 385 00:20:32,920 --> 00:20:33,480 Speaker 5: front and center. 386 00:20:34,840 --> 00:20:38,560 Speaker 1: That leads me to wonder, how much investigating are we 387 00:20:38,640 --> 00:20:41,359 Speaker 1: supposed to do. I've been reading Edgar alam Poe My 388 00:20:41,400 --> 00:20:43,840 Speaker 1: whole Life. I didn't know that he married his thirteen 389 00:20:43,920 --> 00:20:47,359 Speaker 1: year old cousin. How much responsibility do I have consuming 390 00:20:47,520 --> 00:20:51,280 Speaker 1: art to really look into the potential really awful, disgusting 391 00:20:51,359 --> 00:20:52,480 Speaker 1: behavior of the artist. 392 00:20:53,480 --> 00:20:55,240 Speaker 5: Yeah, So, I mean, I don't think that we need 393 00:20:55,240 --> 00:20:59,639 Speaker 5: to become the cops and private investigators of the art world. 394 00:20:59,680 --> 00:21:02,240 Speaker 5: I think that the questions that the moral life of 395 00:21:02,240 --> 00:21:06,679 Speaker 5: the artist poses for everyday our consumers are going to 396 00:21:06,680 --> 00:21:10,280 Speaker 5: be dependent on the kind of information that's part of 397 00:21:10,320 --> 00:21:13,320 Speaker 5: the public discourse, part of the public domain, the things 398 00:21:13,359 --> 00:21:16,360 Speaker 5: that we can reasonably expect people to know. I think 399 00:21:16,400 --> 00:21:18,080 Speaker 5: that if we thought that there was some sort of 400 00:21:18,119 --> 00:21:22,520 Speaker 5: strong moral obligation to do investigative work about every artist 401 00:21:22,600 --> 00:21:25,239 Speaker 5: that we wanted to engage with, not only would that 402 00:21:25,359 --> 00:21:27,320 Speaker 5: make a lot of art not fun for us, but 403 00:21:27,400 --> 00:21:31,320 Speaker 5: it would be overly burdensome and not really sort of 404 00:21:31,320 --> 00:21:34,760 Speaker 5: in the spirit in which we often want to engage 405 00:21:35,040 --> 00:21:38,320 Speaker 5: with the artwork. I think it would prioritize the moral 406 00:21:38,359 --> 00:21:41,679 Speaker 5: life of the artist over other kinds of considerations, like 407 00:21:42,000 --> 00:21:45,120 Speaker 5: our aesthetic engagement with their work. So I think it's 408 00:21:45,119 --> 00:21:47,639 Speaker 5: really more of a question about, given what we know, 409 00:21:48,200 --> 00:21:51,600 Speaker 5: how should we confront that knowledge, not how much can 410 00:21:51,600 --> 00:21:53,640 Speaker 5: we go find out about the moral life of the artist. 411 00:21:54,440 --> 00:21:57,400 Speaker 1: It feels a little bit dangerous only because it almost 412 00:21:57,440 --> 00:22:00,359 Speaker 1: feels like you get rewarded by burying your head in 413 00:22:00,400 --> 00:22:04,439 Speaker 1: the sand, choosing not to read the articles that you know, 414 00:22:04,480 --> 00:22:06,920 Speaker 1: for a while seemingly appeared almost every day in the 415 00:22:06,960 --> 00:22:09,320 Speaker 1: New York Times about how awful a lot of our 416 00:22:09,400 --> 00:22:11,679 Speaker 1: artists were. If you don't look at those if you 417 00:22:11,720 --> 00:22:13,480 Speaker 1: don't read those stories, you're going to be able to 418 00:22:13,560 --> 00:22:14,400 Speaker 1: enjoy a lot more art. 419 00:22:14,880 --> 00:22:17,600 Speaker 5: Yeah, that's it's true. I mean, I think there are 420 00:22:17,880 --> 00:22:20,840 Speaker 5: questions we can ask about what people should reasonably know, 421 00:22:21,280 --> 00:22:24,600 Speaker 5: and those are broad questions that include this conversation that 422 00:22:24,760 --> 00:22:26,760 Speaker 5: all all kinds of other things. And I think sometimes 423 00:22:26,800 --> 00:22:29,879 Speaker 5: people can be subject to criticism for not being aware 424 00:22:29,880 --> 00:22:33,040 Speaker 5: of things that it's reasonable for them to know, given 425 00:22:33,280 --> 00:22:36,040 Speaker 5: how pervasive they are in public discourse and how much 426 00:22:36,080 --> 00:22:38,720 Speaker 5: attention they received in the media. But I think that 427 00:22:38,840 --> 00:22:41,840 Speaker 5: we should certainly approach these issues not in the spirit 428 00:22:41,920 --> 00:22:44,760 Speaker 5: of blaming people. If you encounter somebody who doesn't know 429 00:22:44,800 --> 00:22:47,760 Speaker 5: anything about roll Doll's anti semitism, right, I don't think 430 00:22:47,760 --> 00:22:49,679 Speaker 5: they're response would be how could you not know that? 431 00:22:49,800 --> 00:22:52,280 Speaker 5: But rather, well, now that you know that, that opens 432 00:22:52,359 --> 00:22:54,679 Speaker 5: up space for a conversation about how that is going 433 00:22:54,720 --> 00:22:56,560 Speaker 5: to influence how we engage with the work. 434 00:22:57,200 --> 00:22:59,480 Speaker 1: Eric brings up a really good question, how should we 435 00:22:59,520 --> 00:23:02,760 Speaker 1: engage with the work? For me, especially after my conversation 436 00:23:02,840 --> 00:23:05,080 Speaker 1: with Claire, I'm realizing a lot of it depends on 437 00:23:05,119 --> 00:23:07,879 Speaker 1: whether I can locate the bigotry in the actual text. 438 00:23:08,320 --> 00:23:10,359 Speaker 1: I'm not sure I see it in Doll's stories. But 439 00:23:10,400 --> 00:23:12,520 Speaker 1: what do we do when there's a really clear connection 440 00:23:12,760 --> 00:23:16,000 Speaker 1: between an artist's problematic actions or beliefs and the work 441 00:23:16,040 --> 00:23:19,360 Speaker 1: we consume by them. In our last episode, Roxanne Gay 442 00:23:19,440 --> 00:23:22,120 Speaker 1: talked about the Nobel Prize winning author Alice Monroe, who 443 00:23:22,160 --> 00:23:25,320 Speaker 1: stayed with her second husband despite apparently knowing that he 444 00:23:25,359 --> 00:23:28,080 Speaker 1: abused her daughter. There's a strong case to be made 445 00:23:28,119 --> 00:23:31,080 Speaker 1: that Monroe's guilt comes out in some of her short stories, 446 00:23:31,320 --> 00:23:34,679 Speaker 1: which makes reading these stories for me now feel pretty icky. 447 00:23:35,400 --> 00:23:37,360 Speaker 1: The same goes for a bunch of other artists too. 448 00:23:37,880 --> 00:23:41,000 Speaker 1: Some critics say that in everyone ranging from TS Eliott 449 00:23:41,000 --> 00:23:45,240 Speaker 1: to Ezra Pound to H. P. Lovecraft, Picasso, Hemingway, Mailer 450 00:23:45,440 --> 00:23:48,120 Speaker 1: to even someone like Mel Gibson, you can see there's 451 00:23:48,119 --> 00:23:51,840 Speaker 1: sometimes monumental personal flaws come out in the work, which 452 00:23:51,880 --> 00:23:55,080 Speaker 1: makes engaging with that work really complicated. I spoke more 453 00:23:55,080 --> 00:23:55,680 Speaker 1: about this with. 454 00:23:55,720 --> 00:23:59,680 Speaker 5: Eric Roldel has this very short story for adults, Genesis 455 00:23:59,840 --> 00:24:02,159 Speaker 5: to Catastrophe. I'm going to spoil it, so if you 456 00:24:02,160 --> 00:24:04,760 Speaker 5: don't want to hear it spoiled, you should stop listening. 457 00:24:05,160 --> 00:24:07,119 Speaker 5: But it's a very short story. It involves this kind 458 00:24:07,160 --> 00:24:10,920 Speaker 5: of tense scene in a hospital where a mother is 459 00:24:11,000 --> 00:24:14,639 Speaker 5: going through a complicated delivery, and in a very short space, 460 00:24:14,920 --> 00:24:18,240 Speaker 5: the writing gets you very concerned for her and the 461 00:24:18,240 --> 00:24:22,040 Speaker 5: life of her child. And then it's revealed towards the 462 00:24:22,119 --> 00:24:26,280 Speaker 5: end of the story that the child is Adolf Hitler, 463 00:24:26,480 --> 00:24:30,520 Speaker 5: and so you find yourself in this fascinating and uncomfortable 464 00:24:30,560 --> 00:24:35,240 Speaker 5: position of having your concern about this child put into 465 00:24:35,400 --> 00:24:40,040 Speaker 5: stark tension with your moral abhorrence of Hitler. And the 466 00:24:40,119 --> 00:24:43,240 Speaker 5: thing about the story is that it seems very clearly 467 00:24:43,320 --> 00:24:46,600 Speaker 5: designed in order to put you in that state of tension. 468 00:24:46,840 --> 00:24:50,520 Speaker 5: It seems like you're supposed to have that feeling of, 469 00:24:50,760 --> 00:24:52,480 Speaker 5: oh my gosh, I was still concerned for this child, 470 00:24:52,520 --> 00:24:54,960 Speaker 5: but it's Hitler, you know, how do I grapple with that? 471 00:24:55,480 --> 00:24:59,440 Speaker 5: So once you then put that into this further context 472 00:24:59,440 --> 00:25:02,679 Speaker 5: of knowing about Doll's antisemitism, then it can make you 473 00:25:03,000 --> 00:25:05,639 Speaker 5: feel even further at tensions here of like wait, was 474 00:25:05,760 --> 00:25:07,920 Speaker 5: that interpretation? I just gave the story the right one? 475 00:25:08,119 --> 00:25:10,400 Speaker 5: Are you supposed to feel attention? Is it not actually 476 00:25:10,520 --> 00:25:13,040 Speaker 5: creating that particular kind of tension because there's some sort 477 00:25:13,040 --> 00:25:15,200 Speaker 5: of implicit endorsement of the idea that you should be 478 00:25:15,240 --> 00:25:18,160 Speaker 5: concerned about the survival of baby aidlf Hitler. I think 479 00:25:18,200 --> 00:25:22,240 Speaker 5: it adds even further intrigue to the story and enhances 480 00:25:22,600 --> 00:25:26,359 Speaker 5: some of the esthetic delight and weirdness of it. I 481 00:25:26,400 --> 00:25:28,840 Speaker 5: think when you engage in this kind of process that 482 00:25:28,880 --> 00:25:31,360 Speaker 5: I was just modeling here, sort of thinking through how 483 00:25:31,400 --> 00:25:34,520 Speaker 5: do I fit this knowledge with my experience of the story. 484 00:25:34,880 --> 00:25:36,560 Speaker 5: It's not that we're always going to have some really 485 00:25:36,560 --> 00:25:38,639 Speaker 5: specific answer that we come out with. On the other end, 486 00:25:38,720 --> 00:25:40,600 Speaker 5: we're not just going to say like, oh, yes, actually 487 00:25:40,720 --> 00:25:43,439 Speaker 5: the story just sort of confirms Doll's antisemitism. I think 488 00:25:43,480 --> 00:25:45,760 Speaker 5: there's still space to think. No, it actually is the 489 00:25:45,760 --> 00:25:48,960 Speaker 5: first interpretation. The story really is trying to get you 490 00:25:49,080 --> 00:25:52,680 Speaker 5: to feel this tension. And that's the case. Independently of 491 00:25:52,760 --> 00:25:55,919 Speaker 5: whatever feelings Dull might himself have had, This kind of 492 00:25:55,960 --> 00:25:58,679 Speaker 5: knowledge about the moral life of the artist often just 493 00:25:59,080 --> 00:26:03,480 Speaker 5: enhances our experience of engaging with their work. It makes 494 00:26:03,520 --> 00:26:07,879 Speaker 5: it sometimes even more complex and complicated, and that's a 495 00:26:07,880 --> 00:26:10,399 Speaker 5: real opportunity for us to sort of think with that 496 00:26:10,560 --> 00:26:13,640 Speaker 5: knowledge and engage with the work in light of it, 497 00:26:13,800 --> 00:26:15,439 Speaker 5: rather than saying, oh, I'm not going to read this 498 00:26:15,480 --> 00:26:17,240 Speaker 5: anymore because Doll's anti semitic. 499 00:26:17,520 --> 00:26:19,280 Speaker 1: I'm going to come back to my conversation with Eric 500 00:26:19,320 --> 00:26:21,359 Speaker 1: in a minute. Before I do that, I want to 501 00:26:21,359 --> 00:26:24,880 Speaker 1: dig into a separate, somewhat related topic. And that's the giant, 502 00:26:25,040 --> 00:26:28,920 Speaker 1: fascinating censorship controversy that swirled around Doll a few years ago. 503 00:26:30,640 --> 00:26:33,880 Speaker 1: In twenty twenty three, thirty three years after Doll's death, 504 00:26:34,080 --> 00:26:37,359 Speaker 1: his publisher went through his books and removed all language 505 00:26:37,400 --> 00:26:41,280 Speaker 1: that people might take offense to. The Hollywood Reporter laid 506 00:26:41,320 --> 00:26:43,800 Speaker 1: it out really well in a long article. They explained 507 00:26:43,800 --> 00:26:46,880 Speaker 1: that Doll's fat phobia, for instance, was suddenly at odds 508 00:26:46,920 --> 00:26:50,800 Speaker 1: with changing sensitivities around body of its issues. So Doll's 509 00:26:50,840 --> 00:26:54,320 Speaker 1: publishers removed the word fat from all of his books 510 00:26:54,480 --> 00:26:58,239 Speaker 1: and issued new editions. Augustus Gloup, the Gluttonois boy from 511 00:26:58,280 --> 00:27:02,040 Speaker 1: the Chocolate Factory Tour, is now to as enormous in 512 00:27:02,160 --> 00:27:05,320 Speaker 1: James and the Giant Peach Doll's lines. Aunt Sponge was 513 00:27:05,400 --> 00:27:09,280 Speaker 1: terrifically fat and tremendously flabby at that is now Aunt 514 00:27:09,400 --> 00:27:11,720 Speaker 1: Sponge was a nasty old brute and deserved to be 515 00:27:11,760 --> 00:27:14,640 Speaker 1: squashed by the fruit. And the sensors didn't stop there. 516 00:27:15,000 --> 00:27:18,160 Speaker 1: Anytime Doll wrote that a character was crazy or mad, 517 00:27:18,400 --> 00:27:21,120 Speaker 1: they took it out. The Umpa Lupas and Willy Wonger's 518 00:27:21,119 --> 00:27:24,280 Speaker 1: factory are no longer tiny, titchy, or no higher than 519 00:27:24,320 --> 00:27:27,679 Speaker 1: my knee, but just small. In Matilda, our hero no 520 00:27:27,720 --> 00:27:30,560 Speaker 1: longer reads the problematic author read Yard Kipling, and the 521 00:27:30,600 --> 00:27:34,120 Speaker 1: revised version she now reads Shane Austen. So in that instance, 522 00:27:34,160 --> 00:27:36,400 Speaker 1: the sensors kind of got a two fer, not only 523 00:27:36,480 --> 00:27:39,760 Speaker 1: changing Doll, but also erasing the very existence of Kipling. 524 00:27:41,800 --> 00:27:44,880 Speaker 1: What else, the fantastic mister Fox, he now has three 525 00:27:44,960 --> 00:27:48,640 Speaker 1: daughters instead of three sons. I absolutely cannot explain that 526 00:27:49,000 --> 00:27:52,840 Speaker 1: the BFG, his famous cloak, is no longer black. In fact, 527 00:27:53,040 --> 00:27:55,960 Speaker 1: and this is real, the words black and white were 528 00:27:56,040 --> 00:28:00,240 Speaker 1: systematically deleted throughout Doll's catalog. Even when describing something like 529 00:28:00,280 --> 00:28:03,080 Speaker 1: the color of snow, the very words black and white 530 00:28:03,320 --> 00:28:09,560 Speaker 1: are treated as problematic. So how did these changes even 531 00:28:09,560 --> 00:28:12,400 Speaker 1: come about? According to the New York Times, they were 532 00:28:12,400 --> 00:28:15,439 Speaker 1: made after Dolls of State hired a consultancy group to 533 00:28:15,480 --> 00:28:19,480 Speaker 1: evaluate his work. The consultant's aim was to promote inclusion 534 00:28:19,640 --> 00:28:24,439 Speaker 1: and accessibility in children's literature. Needless to say, fans of 535 00:28:24,480 --> 00:28:28,240 Speaker 1: Dolls and free speech advocates and many others were completely 536 00:28:28,280 --> 00:28:31,480 Speaker 1: freaked out. To take just two examples, the writer Salman 537 00:28:31,560 --> 00:28:36,000 Speaker 1: Rushdie called the revision's absurd censorship. Best Selling writer Philip 538 00:28:36,000 --> 00:28:38,240 Speaker 1: Pullman said it would be better to let Doll's book 539 00:28:38,240 --> 00:28:40,600 Speaker 1: Squa out of print than to alter them without the 540 00:28:40,600 --> 00:28:43,480 Speaker 1: author's consent. And that's kind of the big issue, right, 541 00:28:43,640 --> 00:28:46,760 Speaker 1: that these alterations were made without dolls approval. He was 542 00:28:46,840 --> 00:28:48,960 Speaker 1: long dead, so he didn't have the option of signing 543 00:28:49,000 --> 00:28:51,480 Speaker 1: off on them. Digging into this, I found a bunch 544 00:28:51,520 --> 00:28:55,120 Speaker 1: of fascinating similar examples of artists to states grappling with 545 00:28:55,200 --> 00:28:57,680 Speaker 1: this sort of thing. According to The New York Times, again, 546 00:28:57,880 --> 00:29:00,960 Speaker 1: Agatha Christi, the best selling novelist of all time, had 547 00:29:01,000 --> 00:29:04,240 Speaker 1: her books altered after her death too. The truly galling 548 00:29:04,280 --> 00:29:07,400 Speaker 1: title of her top selling book was changed to and 549 00:29:07,440 --> 00:29:10,720 Speaker 1: then there were none. Christy's great grandson says that without 550 00:29:10,720 --> 00:29:14,720 Speaker 1: that change it would probably be completely unpublishable. Now he's 551 00:29:14,720 --> 00:29:19,120 Speaker 1: not wrong. Similarly, an addition of Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn, 552 00:29:19,320 --> 00:29:23,240 Speaker 1: arguably the great American novel, replaced a racial epithet throughout 553 00:29:23,240 --> 00:29:26,680 Speaker 1: the text overconcerns that such an offensive word was causing 554 00:29:26,720 --> 00:29:30,440 Speaker 1: schools to stop assigning the book. Doctor Seuss's estate took 555 00:29:30,440 --> 00:29:32,960 Speaker 1: a different tack and just stopped publishing half a dozen 556 00:29:33,000 --> 00:29:35,760 Speaker 1: of his books because of the racial and ethnic stereotypes 557 00:29:35,800 --> 00:29:40,040 Speaker 1: in them. Personally, I hate the idea of that amazing 558 00:29:40,040 --> 00:29:42,800 Speaker 1: a Gatha Christi mystery not being published anymore, and I 559 00:29:42,880 --> 00:29:45,680 Speaker 1: genuinely think it would be a tragedy if Huckleberry Finn disappeared. 560 00:29:46,160 --> 00:29:49,640 Speaker 1: But changing in dead author's words is the slipperiest of slips. 561 00:29:50,040 --> 00:29:54,280 Speaker 1: It's really complicated stuff for some. For others it's easy. 562 00:29:54,760 --> 00:29:57,800 Speaker 1: Here's Margaret Atwood, the great novelist of The Handmaid's Tale, 563 00:29:58,040 --> 00:30:01,880 Speaker 1: a book about a dystopian society, encourage his censorship, speaking 564 00:30:01,880 --> 00:30:02,720 Speaker 1: to BBC. 565 00:30:02,480 --> 00:30:07,720 Speaker 6: News, Good luck with Roald Dahl. You're just really going 566 00:30:07,800 --> 00:30:09,600 Speaker 6: to have to replace the whole book if you want 567 00:30:09,640 --> 00:30:13,000 Speaker 6: things to be nice. But this started a long time ago. 568 00:30:13,120 --> 00:30:16,760 Speaker 6: It was the dismification of fairy tales. What do I 569 00:30:16,800 --> 00:30:21,320 Speaker 6: think of it? I'm with Chaucer, who said, if you 570 00:30:21,320 --> 00:30:23,920 Speaker 6: don't like this tale, turn over the page and read 571 00:30:23,960 --> 00:30:24,640 Speaker 6: something else. 572 00:30:26,320 --> 00:30:29,160 Speaker 1: So if we follow Outwood's advice, no one should touch 573 00:30:29,200 --> 00:30:32,000 Speaker 1: Doll's books, Readers should just be allowed to choose which 574 00:30:32,040 --> 00:30:35,080 Speaker 1: stories of his they want to read. Filmmaker Wes Anderson 575 00:30:35,120 --> 00:30:38,400 Speaker 1: feels similarly to that. Would Anderson, of course adapted several 576 00:30:38,440 --> 00:30:41,280 Speaker 1: Doll stories for Netflix. He disagrees with me about the 577 00:30:41,280 --> 00:30:43,760 Speaker 1: big issue here, being a doll isn't alive to give 578 00:30:43,800 --> 00:30:46,640 Speaker 1: his consent to changes. If we're up to Anderson, he 579 00:30:46,680 --> 00:30:48,800 Speaker 1: wouldn't even let a living doll make any changes. 580 00:30:49,680 --> 00:30:52,480 Speaker 7: You know, I'm probably the worst person to ask about this, 581 00:30:52,600 --> 00:30:56,640 Speaker 7: because you know, if you ask me, should Renoir be 582 00:30:56,720 --> 00:30:59,920 Speaker 7: allowed to touch up one of his pictures and modify? 583 00:31:00,040 --> 00:31:03,640 Speaker 7: I would say, no, it's done, somebody bought it, it's 584 00:31:03,640 --> 00:31:06,240 Speaker 7: in a museum. I don't think even the artists. I 585 00:31:06,240 --> 00:31:09,239 Speaker 7: don't want even the artist to modify their work. I 586 00:31:09,320 --> 00:31:12,600 Speaker 7: understand the motivation for it, but I sort of am 587 00:31:12,600 --> 00:31:15,080 Speaker 7: in the school where when the piece of work is 588 00:31:15,080 --> 00:31:19,200 Speaker 7: done and we've we participate in it, the audience participates 589 00:31:19,200 --> 00:31:21,880 Speaker 7: in it, we know it, and so I sort of 590 00:31:21,880 --> 00:31:24,000 Speaker 7: think when it's done, is done, and certainly no one 591 00:31:24,000 --> 00:31:26,640 Speaker 7: who's not an author should be modifying somebody's book. 592 00:31:26,680 --> 00:31:27,160 Speaker 3: He's dead. 593 00:31:27,720 --> 00:31:30,160 Speaker 1: You hear Anderson's argument a lot in the world of film. 594 00:31:30,360 --> 00:31:32,520 Speaker 1: If you're a Star Wars fan, you probably remember the 595 00:31:32,560 --> 00:31:35,520 Speaker 1: hubbub over George Lucas going back into the original trilogy 596 00:31:35,640 --> 00:31:39,040 Speaker 1: years after its release and making changes. He re engineered 597 00:31:39,040 --> 00:31:41,520 Speaker 1: a famous scene, for instance, so that Han Solo doesn't 598 00:31:41,520 --> 00:31:45,040 Speaker 1: shoot first and kill someone in cold blood. Outrage fans 599 00:31:45,160 --> 00:31:47,200 Speaker 1: didn't care that the person making the changes was the 600 00:31:47,200 --> 00:31:51,200 Speaker 1: original creator. To them, like Anderson said, when it's done, 601 00:31:51,480 --> 00:31:54,880 Speaker 1: it's done. But of course this is all academic. Having 602 00:31:54,920 --> 00:31:57,680 Speaker 1: read a lot about Roll Dall, I feel pretty confident 603 00:31:57,720 --> 00:32:00,000 Speaker 1: saying he would not have made the changes his published 604 00:32:00,080 --> 00:32:03,600 Speaker 1: or wanted. Let's go back to my conversation with Eric Mathis. 605 00:32:03,800 --> 00:32:05,280 Speaker 1: I really want to know what he thinks about the 606 00:32:05,280 --> 00:32:06,880 Speaker 1: censorship controversy. 607 00:32:07,080 --> 00:32:11,680 Speaker 5: So I'm really concerned about the ways in which legitimate 608 00:32:11,720 --> 00:32:15,680 Speaker 5: and important concerns about how we take the moral life 609 00:32:15,680 --> 00:32:20,320 Speaker 5: of the artists into account can easily slide into practices 610 00:32:20,320 --> 00:32:23,560 Speaker 5: of censorship, which I'm very opposed to. I think it's 611 00:32:23,680 --> 00:32:26,400 Speaker 5: crucial that we not ignore the moral life of the artist. 612 00:32:26,760 --> 00:32:29,440 Speaker 5: What you do with that knowledge, I think should not 613 00:32:29,600 --> 00:32:33,040 Speaker 5: lead us to try to censor their work. So in 614 00:32:33,080 --> 00:32:36,520 Speaker 5: the context of kids, for instance, and serve children's literature 615 00:32:36,600 --> 00:32:40,560 Speaker 5: and movies and things, I think that children need morally 616 00:32:40,640 --> 00:32:46,200 Speaker 5: complex literature in order to develop into morally sophisticated adults. 617 00:32:46,520 --> 00:32:49,640 Speaker 5: My worry is that when you take morally difficult content 618 00:32:49,960 --> 00:32:52,320 Speaker 5: out of an artist's work, I mean, not only are 619 00:32:52,360 --> 00:32:54,520 Speaker 5: you messing with their work in a way that feels 620 00:32:54,800 --> 00:32:59,040 Speaker 5: artistically illegitimate, but you're also depriving kids of the opportunity 621 00:32:59,080 --> 00:33:03,440 Speaker 5: to wrestle with challenging moral questions. Sometimes they're going to 622 00:33:03,480 --> 00:33:06,200 Speaker 5: need help and wrestling with those questions, and that's why 623 00:33:06,600 --> 00:33:09,160 Speaker 5: we often engage in practices of reading with our kids 624 00:33:09,200 --> 00:33:12,520 Speaker 5: or talking with our kids about the books that they're reading. 625 00:33:12,880 --> 00:33:15,400 Speaker 5: But I think that if you take away that content, 626 00:33:15,440 --> 00:33:19,360 Speaker 5: you're also taking away the opportunity for moral growth and 627 00:33:19,400 --> 00:33:24,000 Speaker 5: discussion and development, and that's not a great way of 628 00:33:24,640 --> 00:33:25,600 Speaker 5: raising our kids. 629 00:33:26,120 --> 00:33:28,000 Speaker 1: I guess, just to push back for a second, or 630 00:33:28,080 --> 00:33:31,440 Speaker 1: to Billy Devil's advocate, some of the censorship they did, 631 00:33:31,880 --> 00:33:36,000 Speaker 1: like removing the descriptors fat and ugly. They feel like 632 00:33:36,040 --> 00:33:38,800 Speaker 1: the kind of thing like, if my kid was reading 633 00:33:39,000 --> 00:33:42,160 Speaker 1: a book that had those words in them, I probably, 634 00:33:42,480 --> 00:33:45,560 Speaker 1: and maybe this is my own moral failing, I probably 635 00:33:45,720 --> 00:33:49,280 Speaker 1: wouldn't stop reading and explain to them why those words 636 00:33:49,280 --> 00:33:51,840 Speaker 1: are problematic the way I would if there was something 637 00:33:51,880 --> 00:33:56,040 Speaker 1: incredibly bigoted or anti semitic. Those words probably do just 638 00:33:56,440 --> 00:33:59,960 Speaker 1: get incepted by the child as normal. If the great 639 00:34:00,080 --> 00:34:03,040 Speaker 1: majority of us are not going to turn those kinds 640 00:34:03,080 --> 00:34:06,400 Speaker 1: of things into a lesson, is it still okay? I mean, 641 00:34:06,560 --> 00:34:10,200 Speaker 1: when it comes to terms like fat, gross, It's not 642 00:34:10,320 --> 00:34:14,080 Speaker 1: as if taking these terms out of kids' books are 643 00:34:14,120 --> 00:34:17,480 Speaker 1: going to prevent kids from hearing these words as they 644 00:34:17,560 --> 00:34:18,640 Speaker 1: go about their lives. 645 00:34:19,040 --> 00:34:22,080 Speaker 5: While I'm sure grant that not everybody who's reading with 646 00:34:22,120 --> 00:34:24,080 Speaker 5: their kids or talking with their kids about books is 647 00:34:24,120 --> 00:34:26,719 Speaker 5: going to take the opportunity to think with them about 648 00:34:26,719 --> 00:34:30,480 Speaker 5: the language being used, at least the opportunity is there 649 00:34:30,520 --> 00:34:32,560 Speaker 5: on the table, and there are ways in which we 650 00:34:32,600 --> 00:34:35,760 Speaker 5: can promote it. So clearly, the publisher in this case 651 00:34:36,040 --> 00:34:39,719 Speaker 5: is taking action to address an issue, so they're committed. 652 00:34:40,040 --> 00:34:42,680 Speaker 5: A different way they could take action would be to 653 00:34:42,760 --> 00:34:47,080 Speaker 5: provide some guidance for kids or for adults on how 654 00:34:47,080 --> 00:34:50,160 Speaker 5: to engage with that content, throw a preface in the book, 655 00:34:50,360 --> 00:34:52,560 Speaker 5: put it in an appendix. Right, There are different ways 656 00:34:52,560 --> 00:34:56,280 Speaker 5: in which we can take these issues seriously without engaging 657 00:34:56,400 --> 00:35:00,239 Speaker 5: in cutting or obscuring. This comes up also in the 658 00:35:00,280 --> 00:35:03,919 Speaker 5: context of you know, art and museums, especially when we 659 00:35:04,200 --> 00:35:06,480 Speaker 5: know things about the moral life of the artist and 660 00:35:07,000 --> 00:35:08,880 Speaker 5: aspects of their moral life sort of come up in 661 00:35:08,920 --> 00:35:10,880 Speaker 5: their work in really explicit ways. So like in the 662 00:35:10,880 --> 00:35:12,960 Speaker 5: case of Gogan, some people say like, oh, well, we 663 00:35:13,000 --> 00:35:15,840 Speaker 5: shouldn't have space on our walls to display gogin. We 664 00:35:15,840 --> 00:35:17,760 Speaker 5: should sort of like take that stuff off the walls. 665 00:35:17,920 --> 00:35:20,280 Speaker 5: That's not a very common view, but it has been expressed. 666 00:35:20,480 --> 00:35:22,920 Speaker 5: My worry about that kind of approach to the problem 667 00:35:23,120 --> 00:35:25,480 Speaker 5: is it's like putting the skeletons back in the closet. 668 00:35:25,680 --> 00:35:28,520 Speaker 5: It's like not a way of taking the accusations and 669 00:35:28,560 --> 00:35:31,160 Speaker 5: the moral life of the artists seriously. In order to 670 00:35:31,200 --> 00:35:33,279 Speaker 5: take it seriously, you need to confront it, and then 671 00:35:33,320 --> 00:35:35,200 Speaker 5: there's a question of what you do once it's on 672 00:35:35,239 --> 00:35:37,200 Speaker 5: the table. But if you sort of take it away, 673 00:35:37,360 --> 00:35:40,960 Speaker 5: then you also take away this opportunity for moral reckoning. 674 00:35:42,239 --> 00:35:44,680 Speaker 1: My favorite book to read my daughter, our favorite book 675 00:35:44,760 --> 00:35:47,560 Speaker 1: to read it night before bed is called Poup poutfish. 676 00:35:47,760 --> 00:35:50,480 Speaker 1: The ending is all about a kiss that is not 677 00:35:50,560 --> 00:35:54,239 Speaker 1: asked for, and there's a Instead of changing it, there's 678 00:35:54,280 --> 00:35:57,320 Speaker 1: simply a disclaimer on the very last page that says 679 00:35:57,560 --> 00:36:00,759 Speaker 1: you should always ask. I would say, I read that 680 00:36:00,840 --> 00:36:03,440 Speaker 1: disclaimer to my daughter. I've read it once and we've 681 00:36:03,440 --> 00:36:06,879 Speaker 1: read Pow Pow Fish one billion times. That said, I'm 682 00:36:07,000 --> 00:36:09,520 Speaker 1: very happy that they did not change the ending. 683 00:36:09,920 --> 00:36:12,640 Speaker 5: Well, I mean, you know, also, these kinds of like interventions, 684 00:36:12,680 --> 00:36:15,239 Speaker 5: they don't always have to happen in the moment or 685 00:36:15,480 --> 00:36:18,440 Speaker 5: or every time. Sometimes I think these are things that 686 00:36:18,480 --> 00:36:21,839 Speaker 5: come up later in life. A kid might read some 687 00:36:22,280 --> 00:36:25,080 Speaker 5: morally problematic content in a book as a kid, and 688 00:36:25,160 --> 00:36:26,960 Speaker 5: nobody talks to them about it at all, But then 689 00:36:27,000 --> 00:36:29,480 Speaker 5: when they're a teenager they think back and they say, huh, 690 00:36:29,600 --> 00:36:31,680 Speaker 5: that was kind of odd that this happened in the book. 691 00:36:31,800 --> 00:36:33,960 Speaker 5: Or I'm sort of raising some worries for me how 692 00:36:34,000 --> 00:36:37,319 Speaker 5: this character was represented, and they have that there right 693 00:36:37,360 --> 00:36:40,399 Speaker 5: as then a resource for thinking with. I don't want 694 00:36:40,400 --> 00:36:43,360 Speaker 5: to sort of oversell the idea that it's about constant 695 00:36:43,400 --> 00:36:46,080 Speaker 5: discussion and engagement, right That's the only way we can 696 00:36:46,120 --> 00:36:48,279 Speaker 5: take the moral content of these works the Moral Lives 697 00:36:48,280 --> 00:36:50,680 Speaker 5: star artist seriously is by talking the issue to death. 698 00:36:50,719 --> 00:36:54,040 Speaker 5: But I think having it there in a child's set 699 00:36:54,120 --> 00:36:58,239 Speaker 5: of intellectual resources allows them the opportunity to then think 700 00:36:58,280 --> 00:37:01,759 Speaker 5: carefully about it, whether on their or in conversation, and 701 00:37:01,800 --> 00:37:04,480 Speaker 5: whether it happens then or whether it happens down the line. 702 00:37:05,960 --> 00:37:08,759 Speaker 1: That was. Eric mathis author of drawing the line what 703 00:37:08,840 --> 00:37:11,239 Speaker 1: to do with the work of immoral artists from museums 704 00:37:11,400 --> 00:37:14,800 Speaker 1: to the movies. I'm so appreciative to Eric, and also 705 00:37:14,800 --> 00:37:17,760 Speaker 1: declare for coming on to talk about these really thorny issues. 706 00:37:18,520 --> 00:37:20,360 Speaker 1: Next week, we're going to lighten things up a little 707 00:37:20,440 --> 00:37:22,319 Speaker 1: and get into a topic very dear to my heart. 708 00:37:22,640 --> 00:37:25,120 Speaker 1: We'll talk about what doll might be most globally famous 709 00:37:25,120 --> 00:37:28,319 Speaker 1: for these days, the film adaptations, which means we get 710 00:37:28,360 --> 00:37:31,520 Speaker 1: to talk about Spielberg and Zamechas and Burton and Clooney 711 00:37:31,600 --> 00:37:34,840 Speaker 1: and Streep and so many more, true or false. Quentin 712 00:37:34,880 --> 00:37:38,520 Speaker 1: Tarantino once directed a Roll Doll story starring Bruce Willis. 713 00:37:38,920 --> 00:37:40,960 Speaker 1: We'll definitely get into that, and I'll speak to the 714 00:37:41,000 --> 00:37:44,680 Speaker 1: man who just might be the single most recognizable voice 715 00:37:45,000 --> 00:37:52,319 Speaker 1: in TV criticism. I can't wait see you there. The 716 00:37:52,360 --> 00:37:55,640 Speaker 1: Secret World of Role Dall Is produced by Imagine Audio 717 00:37:55,800 --> 00:37:59,719 Speaker 1: and Parallax Studios for iHeart Podcasts. Created and written by 718 00:38:00,160 --> 00:38:04,799 Speaker 1: me Aaron Tracy, produced by Matt Schrader. Post production by 719 00:38:05,120 --> 00:38:09,040 Speaker 1: wind Hill Studios, with editing, scoring, and sound design by 720 00:38:09,040 --> 00:38:14,040 Speaker 1: Mark Henry Phillips. Editing by Ryan Seaton, Music by a PM. 721 00:38:14,880 --> 00:38:20,520 Speaker 1: Executive producers Nathan Cloke, Karl Welker, Brian Grazer, Ron Howard, 722 00:38:21,120 --> 00:38:25,359 Speaker 1: and Aaron Tracy. Additional voice performances and recreation by Mark 723 00:38:25,400 --> 00:38:29,040 Speaker 1: Henry Phillips and eleven Laps. If you enjoyed this episode, 724 00:38:29,200 --> 00:38:31,640 Speaker 1: be sure to rate and review The Secret World of 725 00:38:31,800 --> 00:38:35,279 Speaker 1: Roll Dall on Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts. 726 00:38:35,880 --> 00:38:40,960 Speaker 1: Copyright twenty twenty six Imagine Entertainment, iHeartMedia and Parallax