Trump recently mentioned violent media after the Florida shooting (yes, I know, more as a diversion from taking action on gun control), but the topic did cross my mind again this weekend when I tried watching two things on Netflix.
First, the (generally) critically well received Mindhunter. [Spoiler follows]. The first episode starts with a hostage situation, and a very sudden and violent gun suicide. It is quick, but done in a way you would never have envisaged as acceptable for TV violence, say, 20 years ago. (Head pretty much blown off like a watermelon.) The rest of the episode was, I thought, strangely bad in other ways. The acting and dialogue seemed remarkably stilted and unnatural - no one seemed quite real. I won't be watching it again.
Then my son was watching The Punisher - first episode perhaps? I came in late, and was skeptical - I am finding I don't like any Marvel TV or streaming shows that I have sampled.
Well, near the end, the hero goes berserk with a construction hammer, killing or maiming I don't know who (baddies, generically, I assume). The scene was graphic and unpleasantly violent in a way that, again, I think media representation just would not have contemplated a relatively short time ago. I see that some people on Reddit and elsewhere have raised questions about the amount of physical violence in the show, so I know I am not alone. There's something about the idea of a hammer to the head, or watching legs being broken, that I find particularly grotesque.
Now, I know - you can carry on about squeamishness about media depiction of violence in many different ways, pointing to a myriad of psychological studies on its effects and their uncertain results, and get into bigger discussions about how civilised society used to consider actual violence (public executions) as public spectacle.
But I just cannot get over the feeling that certain things make common sense:
a. if military training had to evolve to overcome the ordinary soldier's reluctance to kill, surely it's not unreasonable to think that modern, graphic first person shooter games are doing the same job on the minds of at least the mentally unstable, aggressive male who has thoughts about shooting up his school or workplace. (In fact, I would be curious to know whether modern military training finds it's a lot easier to get their new recruits into no guilt shooting these days, given gaming and media depictions of blood and gore.)
b. psychology has hit a crisis of experimental credibility, yet it would seem that it certainly hasn't spread to skepticism about some of the experiments to do with media violence. And when you read what some of the studies do (for example, look at whether players of Grand Theft Auto are just as likely to pick up someone's dropped pen), you really do have to wonder about their value.
c. the relationship between media and gaming violence and real life violence is obviously not simple, otherwise the rate of crime generally would be going up in the US and Australia, rather than downwards as it has been in the last couple of decades. But does that mean there is no relationship between its increase and potential for negative effects on society or individuals? No, I don't think.
d. the depiction of graphic violence is undoubtedly desensitising to the viewing of violence, and how can that be a good thing? To the contrary, isn't it a positive thing that we now find the idea of watching someone's neck being broken in an hanging as a somewhat grotesque interest in watching death; and if so, why shouldn't I be disturbed that some people have no reservation from watching a realistic depiction of a head being blown off by a shot gun? Surely the desensitising to the viewing of a violent act make it easier for a person of the "right" mind frame to imagine carrying it out themselves? The effect may be so marginal as to not reflect in general crime rates, but gee, there are lot of mass shootings happening in the US at the moment.
My negative feelings are intuitive but impossible to shake; and it is so obvious that the graphic depiction of violence is completely unnecessary for a scene to have emotional impact. And emotional impact is different from desensitising. Why risk desensitising someone who should not be desensitised to an act they can contemplate doing themselves, be it a shooting, stabbing or hammer blow to the head?
Why has it become a non issue to Hollywood, gaming and media producers to contemplate the potential effect of their depiction of violence? It is a strangely non-political issue, too - the Left used to deride movies from (say) the 1980's that seemed to espouse Right wing viewpoints as being too violent; but then with the likes of Tarantino and the generally liberal bias of 95% of Hollywood and movie reviewers, and you would have to say that the Left has given up having any moral concerns at all about violence of any kind.
I think reasonable people should be debating why graphic violence is portrayed so readily and frequently these days, and urging creative types to think seriously about it.
Update: I think my last lengthy post about movie violence was this one, from 2012, and I stand by what I said then. I am bothered that the same things now need to be said about Marvel associated Netflix content.
No comments:
Post a Comment