© Provided by The Hollywood Reporter
Claire Deirdre in 2017 In the Paris Review he wrote: “What do we do with the art of scary people? And it went viral instantly. Less than two months after Harvey Weinstein was released, critics were lashing out at Roman Polanski, Woody Allen, and Bill Cosby (among others). The prism of their abuse was, ‘They did or said terrible things and did wonderful things.'” A terrible thing ruins a great career.” It was the center of an entire book written years before #MeToo. The Movement in Hollywood.
“It seemed like a burning decision, but there was a lot of clarity and subtlety in the essay, and people responded very well,” said the author. The Hollywood Reporter . “As a writer, but also as a citizen, it was interesting to me that everything is not black and white or reducible.”
More from The Hollywood Reporter
Deirdre’s year of working on monsters is over. The Fan’s Dilemma”, Released on April 25. He spoke to Dederer before the book came out. THR About the fans who inspired the book and how society values the work of men and women. And how he wants to use the book.
Since the Harvey Weinstein investigation, many of us have thought a lot about the artist-artist dilemma; What drew you to this subject years ago?
I wrote a memoir about sexual harassment in the 1970s Love and trouble At that time, I was touched by what I experienced as a girl. His piece was an open letter to Roman Polanski; I love his work and I realize that I can still see his films and ideas. “Well, that’s very interesting.” All my books are somehow about being good and what it means to be kind, so they all come together. The benefit of being a veteran writer in your career is that you can think about it for years if something sweet comes along.
Can you tell us more about your first internal conversation with Polankasi?
Not only do I think he’s doing it wrong, but in a really cool way, not in a hip way but in a cool way. There is a bit of a scary experience in this story, which is my sexual harassment. I approach it in the sense of this incredibly complex autobiographical story. The other side is the emotional response to the work. I’m not just a judge who sits there and says what everyone else thinks. Rosemary baby It’s a great movie. In many ways, he is not only very close to me in my career, but he really embodies the concept of good art, bad people.
The book is not intended to be a comprehensive list of all bad or terrible artists, but interestingly, for example, Kanye West has come back many times and I think he wrote before his recent anti-Semitic comments…
First, I wanted to make a conclusion, which is called a litany, and I wanted to list the people who have been accused of something since I started writing the book. But the project of the book was always about the experience of the audience, so the additions became a catalog of monsters that were never imagined.
Lately, I’ve noticed that online conversations about the art we use are shifting from “this person did that bad thing” to “this person may have a bad idea”; The damage this man is doing is worse. Thoughts on Twitter threads and potential misogyny and misogyny of Donald Glover and Drake come to mind. Do you think there is a difference in the way we use the art of bad actors and bad thinkers?
I totally understand what you’re saying and I don’t know that I have a recipe for it. I have children in their 20s and they are online a lot, the experience of participating in such a conversation is completely different from mine. I think it all depends on the concept of my interest, how the work changes on what is known to the individual viewer. In the case of Rage Machine, it’s interesting to think about how it affects the experience of the audience if they spend more time with Rage instead of participating in Rage and asking for their own experiences. It is useful and independent thinking.
Personally, I can disenfranchise marginalized groups by talking about a person or a topic of conversation without knowing that they will not be offended unless the group has pointed it out. As a person of privilege, I want to pay more attention to other people’s visual experiences and hear from those involved, but sometimes I wonder where it ends when I open that door all the way.
I think I’m different from other people because I really enjoy having these conversations. I enjoy seeing how everyone thinks about ethical issues in art. Now I understand the rage machine I’m talking about, but there is room for this conversation to hear the voices of many people who have not been traditionally heard. As someone who dated a lot of young people in their 50s, I’ll try to explain it with a nod if that makes sense.
What made you decide to include memoirs in the book?
It was important to write about the voice of memory and one’s own experience to get the memory of the audience. It was also important for me to reduce critical power. Too often “objective” art criticism is a white male perspective. These whites work for whites and are then controlled by whites.
Add some memories from your years as a film critic. How would you sum up this experience?
As a film critic for an alternative weekly newspaper, I was the youngest person to throw stones at the giant Hollywood machine. I could say what I wanted, I could live in subject matter without thinking about what it meant to the artist. Then I became a book reviewer and the books don’t have much impact and he’s human so I had to start thinking about what it’s like to be a liberal reviewer. It’s another thing for critics to care about what other critics say. Excessive criticism is self-doubt. I remember about writing Total score empty And really wanted to love and talk about it but felt it was too girly? Was it really dishonest?
Another part of the book that struck me was how horrible male criminals are and how often violent men who leave their families and women and how open women are to men. Creating art, but often vice versa. This is a simplification of your thesis, but I read a lot this morning, skipping the third part Inheritance And digging into the mothers who gave space to Jesse Armstrong, Jeremy Strong, and doing this great art…
There was probably a 20-year window in my life when most of my thoughts revolved around childcare. I am now on the other side and I am appalled by the violence and abuse of this institution. Ever since I finished the book, I’ve been thinking about the gendered stereotypes of what nursing is and who is doing it. I talk about empowering mothers in the book, but I think there’s a better way to talk about it, which is to expand the idea of who cares for others. In the book, I described her as an artist, not a mother, but I think she takes care of herself more than others. But at the same time, who wants to give up television for more? I’m glad you did this show. (laughs)
Does being a professional critic change the way things are used? I am mostly referring to it. The sequel It shows what is done by good people.
Isn’t that just great? How to work and relieve stress in the body. But there was a brief period when I gave up film criticism, I couldn’t watch films, but I think that was partly due to the violence of the time. It was a transitional period for Tarantino, a very good one. One of the things I try to do in my life is what I use. I try to free my relationship with art from the influence of authorities, and I think that if you come back to art as an observer, not as an authority, you become a better critic.
The interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Monsters: The Fan’s Dilemma It will be released on April 25.
The Hollywood Reporter is the best.
For more stories like this, follow us on MSN by clicking the button at the top of this page.
Click here to read the full article.
