(This was written in 1989. One never knows if the principles discussed below will be important at some point soon again...)

Whoa!

It's getting to be too much. It's really getting to be too dang much.

Dateline 1988: The movie, The Last Temptation of Christ, is protested, picketted, and virtually pillaged across the nation by peppery protesters most of whom haven't seen the dang thing. And, since I don't live in or around or near a big city, neither did I. The protesters got the small-cow-town movie theatre owners cowed. Some actually admitted this.

Oh, well. After awhile, people forget.

Dateline 1989: The book, Satanic Verses, by one S. Rushdie, ex-Moslem, got many Moslems riled -- ban, ban, ban; burn, burn, burn. And while we're about it, let's shoot the messenger, too! Most of the protesters, again, haven't read the danged Satanic thing, either. And, in this case, knowing the temperment of the Islamic terrorists, it is no wonder if Waldenbooks and other major chains decide the pull the book. I mean -- out of fear for the poor young clerk who manages the store. I'm not blaming them at all, no.

But it is still too dang much. And people will forget. Books have been banned in the past. Protesters from the Left, Right, and Half-Baked, converging together to smite at and stamp out an unwanted book or undesired movie -- whose only sin, when we get right down to it, was in appearing at the wrong place and time.

Do any of you gentle readers have a cause? Okay, maybe it is not a religion. But perhaps it is your own special way of looking at the world. You're pretty attached to it. You have lots of good friends who are attached to it, and so therefore this gives you even stronger ties. Think of something like that, okay?

Okay, some jerk makes a movie or writes a book (movies, being more visual, often have more of an effect -- so think "movie"), in your mind denigrating that idea or ideal which you love and/or have attached yourself to.

You going to protest?

With utter sharpness I can envision the following scene:

A movie theater, the marque announcing the hateful film. Inaccurate, unworthy. Outside, queued up, potential viewers. Outside, potential protesters. But they are protesters with a differece. Indeed, I can see myself among them. Wearing a button declaring, "Ignorance Breeds Fear". And, all of us have seen the movie we stand outside of. We KNOW what we are out there for. And, no one is blocking those aforementioned potential viewers. No, not at all. Indeed, we "protesters" WANT the potential viewers to see the danged movie. After all, Voltaire is our hero -- remember (anyone???) his statement -- poorly paraphrased -- "I will defend to the death anyone's right to their own opinion"? He wasn't going saying that he was going to agree with it. Well, I sort of blanche at the "to the death" part, but beyond that I totally agree with him.

So I see these hypothetical protesters (including me) at a movie theatre. Protesting, to use the easy term. More accurately, I see us people standing or walking back and forth there, with leaflets in hand. Politely handing them to potential viewers. Not blocking their way, at all. Politely and unobtrusively handing out these leaflets. And the leaflets read, "ENJOY THIS FILM. DECIDE FOR YOURSELF. THINK FOR YOURSELF. AND HERE IS FURTHER INFORMATION WHICH THIS FILM HAS OMITTED". Short, polite corrections to the information in the film. References. Good wishes.

Pipe dream??? No way, Jack. Close to ten years ago, I participated in a "protest" regarding the singer Anita Bryant. At that time, the singer was speaking out strongly against gays and equal rights for gays. But the theory of the protest was similar to the above. The group which ran this protest decided to "Kill Her with Kindness". They met her at the airport with a dozen roses (no pies in the face -- what a SILLY -- albeit "dramatic" -- gesture!) We were outside the concert hall, not blocking the entrance. We marched in silence, in a circle, some carrying signs. Afterwards, the organizers invited her to a local gay bar (she, as expected, declined the invitation). Sure, the things we did didn't merit national attention, and we didn't get any. However, I'd rather see results than media attention. Five months later, Anita Bryant decided not to continue with her anti-gay crusade. I can't say for sure why she changed her mind, but I know we did not harm the cause.

I guess the whole lesson is this: If you treat people with dignity, they wll have less of a reason to hide behind hate. Certainly, pies in my face aren't going to change my opinion of anything. In fact, they might piss me off more than ever before. (Guaranteed, actually.)

Same with treating viewers of a hated movie with respect. Or with treating readers/writers of a hated book. The first rule is to know what you are condemning (ie, read or see the danged thing yourself); and the second rule is to allow people to think for themselves.

'Nuff said. Time to go find a good banned book to read.

1999 Followup:

I eventually rented the movie, thought it was well-done, decided that a temptation that didn't have any concurrent urge or desire to decide against wasn't, after all, a temptation, and therefore saw nothing wrong with the movie, even when putting on my formerly-Catholic hat. It is now one of the approximately ten movies I own copies of.

I bought the Rushdie book, and when I finally got around to reading it rather than just owning it as a statement piece, I appreciated it enough to buy and read a couple more of his books. Well recommended on literary merits alone.