|
June 16, 2009 Weeds, Season 5, Episode 2Posted: 01:27 PM ET
NEW YORK – Last night, I watched a rape on television. It was a dramatized rape. But it was jarring, just the same. Weeds, Season 5, Episode 2.
Mary-Louise Parker, star of "Weeds" I have always loved Weeds for its black humor, for its honesty. I love the way in which the show forces us to question our righteousness, our ability to pass judgment on our friends and neighbors, despite the disorder of our own houses. As a criminal defense attorney who cut her teeth on petty drug cases, I like most the show's "There but for the grace of God go I" premise. But I'm not sure where this rape fits in. Or whether it fits in at all. Weeds was created by Jenji Kohan, who is also the head writer. Jenji is a woman who, until now, has seemed to get womanhood; Weeds, after all, is so firmly rooted in our power, as women, in some circumstances and our complete powerlessness in others. Nancy Botwan, the main character who deals with her husbands sudden death by dealing pot in her suburban neighborhood, certainly understands the power of sexuality, the relative powerlessness of single motherhood and the foolish ways in which men respond to women in crisis. So Jenji must know about all of this too. She writes it. Its her show. And she must also know a thing or two about this age-old problem of rape. She must have known what she was doing with this rape scene. Even assuming we should ever dramatize rape (a debate that raged in the days and weeks after the release of the film, "The Accused" in the 1980s) there must be some point to it. But they lost me on this one. No matter that the victim is in love with this man who rapes her; no matter that she is pregnant with his child; no matter that he has said he loves her; no matter that they were in a relationship. It is still a rape. Most disturbing is that this victim seems to enjoy it. And that's where fact and fiction diverge dramatically. Because rape, as we all know (or should all know), is not sex. It is violence. And it is a crime. No matter who the perpetrator. A husband can rape his wife and, sadly, it happens all the time. And when we suggest that women like it, I fear we encourage it. I don't know that to be true. I just worry that is will be. I am not sure what to do with all of this. I firmly believe in artistic freedom, even when I don't understand the point the artist is trying to make. But we, as the consumers of art, also have the right to walk away if the message offends. Recently I have seen the word "boycott" graffitied on billboards for Weeds. I thought it was an anti-drug message and scoffed at the messenger who clearly hadn't watched (or perhaps misunderstood) the show. But I now believe that message is about the rape scene. And if so, the messenger is right that rape should neither be tolerated nor celebrated. So will I boycott? Will I stop watching Weeds? I don't know. But I'm thinking about it. If I do, I will miss Silas and Shane and Celia and all the whacky characters as they struggle with the fallout of Nancy's bad choices. I will miss Nancy most of all. But then again, this is not the Nancy I've come to love over 4 seasons of loyal viewership. This Nancy (and her rapist boyfriend/drug kingpin/father of her child) may not be worth watching at all. -Jami Floyd, In Session anchor Filed under: Uncategorized |
Contact us
Recent Posts
In Session Team
Archive
Categories
|
Loading weather data ...