Woody Allen & Why Nihilists Make Bad Babysitters

[roo_ster]

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/woody-allen-nihilists-babysitters/
http://theweek.com/article/index/255928/woody-allen-nihilist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimes_and_Misdemeanors

Damon Linker has a reflection this morning on what we both believe is Woody Allen’s greatest film: 1989′s Crimes and Misdemeanors. Linker says that while no one who is not Woody Allen or Dylan Farrow knows for sure whether or not Allen molested her, we can know from this film, and Allen’s discussions about it, that in the director’s mind, there is no moral barrier to child molestation.

It’s not that the movie endorses child molestation. It’s rather that the movie is an extremely effective exploration of the implications of nihilism. The drama centers around Judah, a successful eye doctor tempted to commit murder to save his marriage and reputation. The moral lesson of the film is that if God doesn’t exist, there is no such thing as ultimate justice. If you can avoid getting caught, and you don’t feel guilty, then there is no reason not to commit murder, if it is to your advantage. Judah is an eye doctor, an exponent of the scientific study of sight. He exists as a philosophical counterpoint to Ben, a believing rabbi who is going blind. The first time I saw the film, I thought this was Woody Allen’s ironic commentary on moral vision. The vision expert is morally blind, while the rabbi who loses his vision sees moral truth clearly.

But I was wrong. Allen believes Judah sees more truly. Linker:

    We know that this was Allen’s intent because he’s said so. Ben, according to Allen, “doesn’t really understand the reality of life…and that’s why I wanted to make him blind. I feel that his faith is blind. It will work, but it requires closing your eyes to reality.” And what is reality? That “at best the universe is indifferent” to our lives and our various ways of construing right and wrong. This indifference is so awful that many of us feel driven to “create a fake world for ourselves, and we exist within that fake world...”

    ...It means nothing. In the same way we create for ourselves a world that, in fact, means nothing at all, when you step back. It’s meaningless.

...What is useful about Allen’s nihilism is that he really does see the implications of that worldview more clearly than many, many others who profess a softer form of nihilism. That is, many people would believe that there’s no ultimate truth, that whatever you think is true is true for you. That the universe is meaningless; whatever meaning exists is meaning we give it. If that’s your view, says Woody Allen, then you must agree that the murderer has understood the reality of things better than the moralist....

Did not Secondhand Lions have something to say about this?

[Ron]

I recently read the article written by his step daughter who claims he molested her repeatedly. It was not a good read at all, feeling rage about circumstances I have zero ability to influence cannot be healthy.

His work, his life and his own statements about life that I've read over the years lends credence to her story in my mind.

Woody Allen could be a true believer who has taken his belief system to its logical conclusion. He is the post modern poster child.

Or, just as probable, he has chosen a philosophy that allows him to justify his predilections; thereby avoiding any sense of guilt.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/2014/02/02/shame_on_those_who_protected_woody_allen_324896.html

[Hawkmoon]

Woody Allen could be a true believer who has taken his belief system to its logical conclusion. He is the post modern poster child.

Or, just as probable, he has chosen a philosophy that allows him to justify his predilections; thereby avoiding any sense of guilt.

Woody Allen could perhaps be a lot of things, but what he is (IMHO) is a piece of excrement.

I have never seen one of his films, and I have never read anything about the man to suggest to me that there is one iota of a reason why I should consider ever seeing one of his films in the future.

[roo_ster]

Woody Allen could perhaps be a lot of things, but what he is (IMHO) is a piece of excrement.

I have never seen one of his films, and I have never read anything about the man to suggest to me that there is one iota of a reason why I should consider ever seeing one of his films in the future.

"Know your enemy." 

There is a whole world view on display in many movies and teevee shows.

[Perd Hapley]

Screwed up people can make good entertainment. If they didn't, who else would? Keep in mind that "Firefly" was a fluke.

[Strings]

>Or, just as probable, he has chosen a philosophy that allows him to justify his predilections; thereby avoiding any sense of guilt.<

Keep in mind that many pedophiles look for positions where they have power over children. That's why you always hear about molesters being cops, clergy, scout leaders, teachers and the like. If they do that, why wouldn't they choose a philosophy that says what they're doing is just fine? Remember: the bad guys don't believe that they're evil

>Keep in mind that "Firefly" was a fluke.<

Not really. That was an example of a great entertainer pushing his boundries, and writing the diameteric opposite of his own beliefs (and doing a good job of it). Whedon is known for pushing that envelope.

[Perd Hapley]

>Keep in mind that "Firefly" was a fluke.<

I meant that none of his other work has been especially memorable. (I never miss a chance to impugn Buffy.  )

[Boomhauer]

This is just another way that those doing wrong will try to justify it. The term "true believer" is quite succinct.

[fifth_column]

<<
snip>>

Or, just as probable, he has chosen a philosophy that allows him to justify his predilections; thereby avoiding any sense of guilt.

<<snip>>

This is certainly nothing unusual.  Those convinced of their own righteousness are usually the most dangerous to those around them. 

I'm not defending Woody Allen, or pedophiles.  I'm pointing out that it is our belief systems that are often used to justify our decisions.  I have found that determining, or at least attempting to determine, the difference between belief and truth is extremely difficult.  There's honestly nothing to gain by the exercise, which is why most people make no attempt at it whatsoever. 

[RevDisk]

Meh. "Nihilism made me do it". It's original in its specifics, cliche in the general commonness of trying to avoid responsibility for one's actions.

More likely, he's just a pedophile. Pedophiles have legions of theories and whatnot dressed up to make them sound being things other than evil creatures. Shrinks and doctors too often enable them. Bottom line is sexual assault is wrong, doing so of minors is extra wrong. Intentionally hurting other people outside of self-defense is wrong. Morally, ethically, legally, religiously. The circumstances make it less or more understandable but it's still based off people are their own masters. This is not rocket surgery.

That said, I'm hardly shocked that society cuddles a pedophile because of his occupation. I grew up in a small town here in PA. During the whole Penn State thing, I will acknowledge I was impressed by their honesty. Football was more important than children being raped, and MANY folks were not shy nor quiet about that opinion. With such an affirmation I honestly suspect many would have held the same opinion even if it was their own children being raped by Sandusky while school officials busily covered it up.

So a celebrity is being given special consideration because he's an actor, or wealthy. All of the theories in the world don't change the reality.

Here's an interesting notion. Some judge was bat excrement insane enough to allow Woody Allen to adopt two girls after molestation allegations and marrying his pseudo step daughter. Granted, Woody Allen has not been proven to have done anything illegal. Legally innocent and until proven guilty. But really? REALLY?

[Jocassee]

I've only seen one of his movies once on TCM. Interiors. Ye gods it was depressing, and had nothing redemptive about it whatsoever. Definitely nihilistic.

On the other hand, it made me a critic.

I'm with REV on this one. I think he's just a perv.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

another voice weighs in
http://www.justjared.com/2014/02/05/dylan-farrows-brother-moses-defends-their-dad-woody-allen-he-did-not-molest-my-sister/

[KD5NRH]

Did not Secondhand Lions have something to say about this?

"Well. We'll see what the man's sellin'. Then we'll shoot him."

[Ron]

another voice weighs in
http://www.justjared.com/2014/02/05/dylan-farrows-brother-moses-defends-their-dad-woody-allen-he-did-not-molest-my-sister/

Just for the record and there is a link at the link if you like.

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2014/02/woody-allen-sex-abuse-10-facts

[roo_ster]

"Well. We'll see what the man's sellin'. Then we'll shoot him."

Not the quote I was thinking of, but it will serve.

[AJ Dual]

My personal take is that Allen probably did enough to be charged with something on the child abuse spectrum. And that Mia is a piece of work herself, so much that it's enough to poison the credibility well.

Stalemate.

[Strings]

The accusations don't come from Mia, AJ

I've read through some of the lit on this. It sounds like the only reason Allen didn't get to spend some time in jail is that the prosecutor didn't want to put Dylan through a trial