Roman Polanski Arrested

[Solon]

photogravures and not photographs? were they orignally publihsed elsewhere and separated alter or were they published as stand alone photogravures?

Definitely photogravures, but made from photograph negatives. Apparently, at the time it was easier to mass produce photogravures than photographs. She published these in a volume in 1937 after her trip to Greece which figured so heavily in Olympia.

Here and here, and here are examples of Riefenstahl's Acropolis images. These are the three that I own.

This is one of my favorites: Jesse Owens.

[creekster]

Definitely photogravures, but made from photograph negatives. Apparently, at the time it was easier to mass produce photogravures than photographs. She published these in a volume in 1937 after her trip to Greece which figured so heavily in Olympia.

Here and here, and here are examples of Riefenstahl's Acropolis images. These are the three that I own.

This is one of my favorites: Jesse Owens.

I think photogravure was the only way to publish photos in quality at the time (someone correct me if I am wrong). I have some photography books I bouyght in the 70s that use photogravure and the depth of the reproductions is phemnomenal.

I really like that third acropolis photo, btw. very nicely done.

[faith]

As I was reading through this thread, I became a bit agitated. I don’t know how to articulate my frustration, but I will attempt to do so... Human beings are complex. We aren’t “all evil” or “all good”, and I think that we detract from people’s humanity and lose the opportunity to understand them when we only examine them superficially. I do not believe that Polansky should escape consequences for drugging and raping a thirteen year old girl. Yet to refuse to recognize that he might create important, insightful art, and to refuse to recognize that parts of him might be good seems to leave us ignorant of the reality of human experience. Martin Luther King Jr. said “There is some good in the worst of us and some evil in the best of us. When we discover this, we are less prone to hate our enemies.” He also said, “We must develop and maintain the capacity to forgive. He who is devoid of the power to forgive is devoid of the power to love.” I definitely believe that people should pay their debt to society for the crimes that they commit - it is extremely important for order in society. But I don’t believe that we should presume to ever judge people’s hearts. One Mormon teaching that I love is the idea that God knows our hearts and will be our ultimate judge. So it isn’t our place to judge, but we can attempt to seek understanding.

Tim, I really appreciate what you shared in this thread. I feel that you were acknowledging the complexity of our human experiences.

[wuapinmon]

As I was reading through this thread, I became a bit agitated. I don’t know how to articulate my frustration, but I will attempt to do so... Human beings are complex. We aren’t “all evil” or “all good”, and I think that we detract from people’s humanity and lose the opportunity to understand them when we only examine them superficially. I do not believe that Polansky should escape consequences for drugging and raping a thirteen year old girl. Yet to refuse to recognize that he might create important, insightful art, and to refuse to recognize that parts of him might be good seems to leave us ignorant of the reality of human experience. Martin Luther King Jr. said “There is some good in the worst of us and some evil in the best of us. When we discover this, we are less prone to hate our enemies.” He also said, “We must develop and maintain the capacity to forgive. He who is devoid of the power to forgive is devoid of the power to love.” I definitely believe that people should pay their debt to society for the crimes that they commit - it is extremely important for order in society. But I don’t believe that we should presume to ever judge people’s hearts. One Mormon teaching that I love is the idea that God knows our hearts and will be our ultimate judge. So it isn’t our place to judge, but we can attempt to seek understanding.

Tim, I really appreciate what you shared in this thread. I feel that you were acknowledging the complexity of our human experiences.

faith, I understand what you're saying. My own feeling is that Mr. Polanski was too cowardly to face the consequences of his actions. He paid her an undisclosed sum for the offense, but he has never been "brought to justice." I do not believe that any plea was ever recorded, nor can I find any record of him ever having allocuted which is a usual requirement of a plea agreement (at least on L&O). A judge can use his/her discretion about whether to accept the terms of a deal. Polanski could've been railroaded, but given the girls' deposition--that he confined her under false pretenses, drugged her with alcohol and a quaalude so he could assure her moral malleability, and then had non-consensual anal sex with her--the original terms of the plea agreement were so watered down that they really only paid lip-service to any semblance of justice. He didn't just get wasted at a party and wake up from his drunken stupor having sex with someone who may or may not have given consent; no, this was a purposeful plot to get her into his bed; she was 13 years old.

I do not hold that he has paid his price by living a law-abiding life since then, nor does his paying her hush money equal justice or contrition. I also cannot abide the notion that he did this horrendous thing some eight years after his wife's brutal murder due to some kind of post-traumatic diminished capacity excuse. Certainly I can see how something like that will forever change your interaction with the world. It has to alter you, but this isn't something that should make someone feel bad for judging his actions as evil, or for forsaking his artistic production. Any quick reading of his and Tate's relationship will clearly show that his misogynistic attitude towards women did not suddenly begin after her murder. He was a rat-cheating-bastard long before she died. Whether he could or would do the same thing today is irrelevant; he admitted (though not officially, yet) that he did what she said he did, and it's only because of his substantial personal means that he was able to flee and live and avoid the consequences of his actions. He is no victim; he's a perfect example of how celebrities often get a pass for bad behavior due to their artistic ability.

Chinatown is an outstanding film, and his artistry isn't the subject in question. He's a pig of a man and he deserves whatever punishment the court meets out, and probably a little bit more (I'm against vigilantes, and I think wishing prison rape on someone is barbaric). God can judge, but so can we. We're just not supposed to judge unrighteously. I've never drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl in the ass, so I think it's okay to weigh in on this matter with a little vehemence and rancor.

[ewth8tr]

faith, I understand what you're saying. My own feeling is that Mr. Polanski was too cowardly to face the consequences of his actions. He paid her an undisclosed sum for the offense, but he has never been "brought to justice." I do not believe that any plea was ever recorded, nor can I find any record of him ever having allocuted which is a usual requirement of a plea agreement (at least on L&O). A judge can use his/her discretion about whether to accept the terms of a deal. Polanski could've been railroaded, but given the girls' deposition--that he confined her under false pretenses, drugged her with alcohol and a quaalude so he could assure her moral malleability, and then had non-consensual anal sex with her--the original terms of the plea agreement were so watered down that they really only paid lip-service to any semblance of justice. He didn't just get wasted at a party and wake up from his drunken stupor having sex with someone who may or may not have given consent; no, this was a purposeful plot to get her into his bed; she was 13 years old.

I do not hold that he has paid his price by living a law-abiding life since then, nor does his paying her hush money equal justice or contrition. I also cannot abide the notion that he did this horrendous thing some eight years after his wife's brutal murder due to some kind of post-traumatic diminished capacity excuse. Certainly I can see how something like that will forever change your interaction with the world. It has to alter you, but this isn't something that should make someone feel bad for judging his actions as evil, or for forsaking his artistic production. Any quick reading of his and Tate's relationship will clearly show that his misogynistic attitude towards women did not suddenly begin after her murder. He was a rat-cheating-bastard long before she died. Whether he could or would do the same thing today is irrelevant; he admitted (though not officially, yet) that he did what she said he did, and it's only because of his substantial personal means that he was able to flee and live and avoid the consequences of his actions. He is no victim; he's a perfect example of how celebrities often get a pass for bad behavior due to their artistic ability.

Chinatown is an outstanding film, and his artistry isn't the subject in question. He's a pig of a man and he deserves whatever punishment the court meets out, and probably a little bit more (I'm against vigilantes, and I think wishing prison rape on someone is barbaric). God can judge, but so can we. We're just not supposed to judge unrighteously. I've never drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl in the ass, so I think it's okay to weigh in on this matter with a little vehemence and rancor.

:clap:

[faith]

faith, I understand what you're saying. My own feeling is that Mr. Polanski was too cowardly to face the consequences of his actions. He paid her an undisclosed sum for the offense, but he has never been "brought to justice." I do not believe that any plea was ever recorded, nor can I find any record of him ever having allocuted which is a usual requirement of a plea agreement (at least on L&O). A judge can use his/her discretion about whether to accept the terms of a deal. Polanski could've been railroaded, but given the girls' deposition--that he confined her under false pretenses, drugged her with alcohol and a quaalude so he could assure her moral malleability, and then had non-consensual anal sex with her--the original terms of the plea agreement were so watered down that they really only paid lip-service to any semblance of justice. He didn't just get wasted at a party and wake up from his drunken stupor having sex with someone who may or may not have given consent; no, this was a purposeful plot to get her into his bed; she was 13 years old.

I do not hold that he has paid his price by living a law-abiding life since then, nor does his paying her hush money equal justice or contrition. I also cannot abide the notion that he did this horrendous thing some eight years after his wife's brutal murder due to some kind of post-traumatic diminished capacity excuse. Certainly I can see how something like that will forever change your interaction with the world. It has to alter you, but this isn't something that should make someone feel bad for judging his actions as evil, or for forsaking his artistic production. Any quick reading of his and Tate's relationship will clearly show that his misogynistic attitude towards women did not suddenly begin after her murder. He was a rat-cheating-bastard long before she died. Whether he could or would do the same thing today is irrelevant; he admitted (though not officially, yet) that he did what she said he did, and it's only because of his substantial personal means that he was able to flee and live and avoid the consequences of his actions. He is no victim; he's a perfect example of how celebrities often get a pass for bad behavior due to their artistic ability.

Chinatown is an outstanding film, and his artistry isn't the subject in question. He's a pig of a man and he deserves whatever punishment the court meets out, and probably a little bit more (I'm against vigilantes, and I think wishing prison rape on someone is barbaric). God can judge, but so can we. We're just not supposed to judge unrighteously. I've never drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl in the ass, so I think it's okay to weigh in on this matter with a little vehemence and rancor.

Wuap -

Thank you for sharing your perspective - I don’t think that you totally understood what I was saying. I do think that Polanski’s actions were atrocious. I do believe he very much ought to be punished and I strongly agree that it is important to judge those actions as being evil , but I still do not think that we have a right to judge his heart. While I do not believe that he should get a pass for his behavior due to his artistic ability, I also do not know that he is completely a “pig of a man”. He may or may not be a victim. I just know from personal experience that there is so much more to people than meets the eye. It is so easy to divide people into “good” and “evil” categories, and the reality is that we are so much more a mixture of both. I know people who have done terrible things, yet I have also seen them be wonderful and kind. I am not denying or excusing the horrendousness of the crime Polanski committed - I just believe that we should be careful about assuming we understand someone’s heart, whether it be Polanski, Bush, or my next door neighbor. Punish him, but seek to understand him. You can all disagree with me, but I truly believe that whenever we create people into “the other”, we become more ignorant of our world and of our human family.

[wuapinmon]

Wuap -

Thank you for sharing your perspective - I don’t think that you totally understood what I was saying. I do think that Polanski’s actions were atrocious. I do believe he very much ought to be punished and I strongly agree that it is important to judge those actions as being evil , but I still do not think that we have a right to judge his heart. While I do not believe that he should get a pass for his behavior due to his artistic ability, I also do not know that he is completely a “pig of a man”. He may or may not be a victim. I just know from personal experience that there is so much more to people than meets the eye. It is so easy to divide people into “good” and “evil” categories, and the reality is that we are so much more a mixture of both. I know people who have done terrible things, yet I have also seen them be wonderful and kind. I am not denying or excusing the horrendousness of the crime Polanski committed - I just believe that we should be careful about assuming we understand someone’s heart, whether it be Polanski, Bush, or my next door neighbor. Punish him, but seek to understand him. You can all disagree with me, but I truly believe that whenever we create people into “the other”, we become more ignorant of our world and of our human family.

faith, I understand what you're saying, and I see where you're going, and I thank you for taking the time to restate your position. I will say that I have absolutely little interest in understanding Polanski. He is the Other by his own marginalization, not because we have decided to punish him for what he did. Any attempt I made to understand him would get bogged down in the more prurient side of his acts and what he has suffered. Certainly he'll have excuses for what he's done, and there are certainly causative factors to influence his behavior on that day, and I'm not on any jury, but at some point we have a right to condemn evil. Whether he is wholly evil is irrelevant; I'm sure he's done lots of good things, from an altruistic place or a misguided attempt to expiate his sins, but I don't care. His actions outside of this one, this one big thing, this one horrific, nigh unpardonable, heinous act is (since you used a Lacanian term) le objet petit á, the bloodiest stain in my visual field, that I cannot see past. That act was so evil as to outweigh his vestigial goodness. Had he faced the music all those years ago, and atoned for his crime, shown some contrition, then my song would be different today, but, no, I can't. I can't let this go without calling evil, evil, for that's what it was, and any attempt to understand him or his actions, when there is an admission of guilt, is just delving further into the spectacle of it all. Yours is the classic gallows question in shaggy-dog stories, "Why?" I don't care what the answer is, not because I've judged him, but because the answer does not matter to anyone, not even him, as evidenced by his flight from justice.

I will never watch his films by choice because I do wish to participate in his message due to my abhorrence of the messenger.

[RockyBalboa]

Let's keep this simple: He's a piece of shit that screwed a 13 year old girl then like a true coward, took off so that he wouldn't have to face the legal ramifications for screwing a 13 year old girl.

It REALLY is that simple.

He should suffer for that...in spades. And I'm not talking about the "Let's try to understand him and study him and see why and how someone like him did what he did"

If he has any regret than he can spend the rest of his days rotting away in Prison "regretting it"...but no....we should understand the real Roman...and we should understand and feel empathy for his torment. Woe is Roman. He's not the victim here. We don't know his heart. Spare me.

Far as I'm concerned pieces of shit like him deserve and have earned the right to be executed for such a disgustingly heinous crime. Hell yes we have the right to judge his heart. Hell yes we have the right to force him to pay the piper. Yes I will judge this man, his actions, his heart, and his disgusting means of behavior. He's a piece of shit...so let's stop with the reverse garbage right now. I simply won't tolerate it. His heart is black and evil. It is absolutely our place in society to judge a man who drugged and raped a 13 year old. In fact we have an obligation to do so.

He has got off easy. Spare me the..."lets understand him psychological bullshit ploy." The whole..."Yes what he did was bad...but" Lines are disgusting on their face. There is no "But..." He's a pedophile.

He's a pedophile.

Pedophiles deserve to be put to death. I am so damn sick and tired of people trying to re-define evil under the supposed auspices of trying to "understand him better" and put a different face on it and in the process re-defining the faces of victimization. Roman Polanski sure as hell is no victim. Let's stop the "Yeah...but's". It's a sickening and disturbing thought process.

Anyone who has been a victim of abuse has just been shit on by that thought process and as one who's been a victim of abuse I simply cannot and will not let that stand, and would be betraying everything that is right were I too remain silent on an issue like this.

I'd love to have just 3 minutes alone with a pedophile/rapist like Roman Polanski......He would have to be carried out afterwards, and there wouldn't be a scintilla of regret on my part for effing him up.

Thus endeth the rant and I've said my peace and will not respond further to any reactions and opinions to my post.

[wuapinmon]

Let's keep this simple: He's a piece of shit that screwed a 13 year old girl then like a true coward, took off so that he wouldn't have to face the legal ramifications for screwing a 13 year old girl.

It REALLY is that simple.

He should suffer for that...in spades. And I'm not talking about the "Let's try to understand him and study him and see why and how someone like him did what he did"

If he has any regret than he can spend the rest of his days rotting away in Prison "regretting it".

Far as I'm concerned pieces of shit like him deserve and have earned the right to be executed for such a disgustingly heinous crime.

He has got off easy. Spare me the..."lets understand him psychological bullshit ploy." The whole..."Yes what he did was bad...but" Lines are disgusting on their face. There is not "But..." He's a pedophile.

He's a[n] pedophile ephebophile and a rapist.

PedophilesRapists deserve to be put to death. I am so damn sick and tired of people trying to re-define evil and put a different face on it.

Thus endeth the rant.

I fixed the factual inaccuracies of your rant.

[CJF]

I fixed the factual inaccuracies of your rant.

I'm sure this has been discussed, so forgive me if I'm incorrect. I was under the impression that pedophilia is not confined to only prepubescent childern, but all minors unable to legally consent to sexually activities. Under that umbrella Roman Polanski would be a pedophile. I don't think the two terms are mutually exclusive. Again, I could be wrong.

[dabrockster]

For me, the Polanski issue has always pointed me toward thoughts about the impact of trauma on our personal lives more than any type of derision of the man himself. Some seriously wild things happened to the man, and his actions might have been his response to those traumas.

My little brother and my sisters were in the car accident that killed my mom, and they did some wild things in the subsequent years. In some ways, their personalities completely changed at that moment. Most of the time I've kindof looked away from the stupid things they've done since then, especially in the case of my little brother, saying, "well, he's been through a lot. I can't imagine what he went through, so while his actions aren't excusable, they might be understandable, at least in the context of his own mind."

I apply that same principle to Roman Polanski and always have.

I'm sorry but I will have to disagree with this response, and feel it only enables people to have such bad behavior and act upon them..

Having been a person who has been through a traumatic event at a young age (My closest friend was shot/killed in my presence at the age of 13). Did my life change or did I see the world differently? Did I begin to see grey areas on right from wrong? No I did not. I knew right from wrong before my friend was killed and I knew it afterwards. I remained strong to what was right knowing full well the consequences for my actions..

To apply such sympathy to those who have made bad decision in my mind only enables the behavior and said actions..

[dabrockster]

faith, I understand what you're saying. My own feeling is that Mr. Polanski was too cowardly to face the consequences of his actions. He paid her an undisclosed sum for the offense, but he has never been "brought to justice." I do not believe that any plea was ever recorded, nor can I find any record of him ever having allocuted which is a usual requirement of a plea agreement (at least on L&O). A judge can use his/her discretion about whether to accept the terms of a deal. Polanski could've been railroaded, but given the girls' deposition--that he confined her under false pretenses, drugged her with alcohol and a quaalude so he could assure her moral malleability, and then had non-consensual anal sex with her--the original terms of the plea agreement were so watered down that they really only paid lip-service to any semblance of justice. He didn't just get wasted at a party and wake up from his drunken stupor having sex with someone who may or may not have given consent; no, this was a purposeful plot to get her into his bed; she was 13 years old.

I do not hold that he has paid his price by living a law-abiding life since then, nor does his paying her hush money equal justice or contrition. I also cannot abide the notion that he did this horrendous thing some eight years after his wife's brutal murder due to some kind of post-traumatic diminished capacity excuse. Certainly I can see how something like that will forever change your interaction with the world. It has to alter you, but this isn't something that should make someone feel bad for judging his actions as evil, or for forsaking his artistic production. Any quick reading of his and Tate's relationship will clearly show that his misogynistic attitude towards women did not suddenly begin after her murder. He was a rat-cheating-bastard long before she died. Whether he could or would do the same thing today is irrelevant; he admitted (though not officially, yet) that he did what she said he did, and it's only because of his substantial personal means that he was able to flee and live and avoid the consequences of his actions. He is no victim; he's a perfect example of how celebrities often get a pass for bad behavior due to their artistic ability.

Chinatown is an outstanding film, and his artistry isn't the subject in question. He's a pig of a man and he deserves whatever punishment the court meets out, and probably a little bit more (I'm against vigilantes, and I think wishing prison rape on someone is barbaric). God can judge, but so can we. We're just not supposed to judge unrighteously. I've never drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl in the ass, so I think it's okay to weigh in on this matter with a little vehemence and rancor.

I think I have a mancrush.... Well said...

[Rosebud]

Awww Wuap..... I'm still so flattered... but I was so busy that I missed the call . Not that it matters, but my opinion is pretty much in line with yours, KillerDog's and creekster's. The three of you were plenty articulate. Thanks for the good read. As a society we need to have a zero-tolerance policy towards behaviors like Polanski's.

I actually also believe that there's a lot of validity to the point that Faith makes. My guess is that most people who hurt others have also been hurt themselves. Many (if not most) perpetrators have experience being on the victim side. Among animals, humans have the unique ability to put themselves in each other's shoes. IMO, this ability makes us more responsible for the ways we hurt one another. Learning to be Christlike is about choosing not to hurt others even when we have been hurt ourselves.

No matter how hurt and traumatized Polanski was, he chose to hurt someone for his own pleasure. Luckily none of us have been called upon to judge his soul because, as Tim points out, we don't have enough information about his life to make a righteous judgement. But come on... as fellow members of society we HAVE to put our feet down against crimes like this. I can have compassion for Polanski, but he still made the decision to take advantage of someone he had power over. Compassion or no, his actions have been despicable.



Falafel also makes a good point. IMO, we may unknowingly appreciate the products of many talented people who commit horrendous crimes. Of course I don't really know anything about Polanski.... but doesn't it make sense that he might have committed several other similar crimes without being caught? If he had been a little more liberal with the drugs he could have gone on with his career without anyone batting an eye. Who is to say that in his mind his big mistake was that he got found out... not that he hurt a little girl? IMO, most innocent and sincere people would be more than shocked if they knew others' secrets. (Please note that I'm NOT trying to make a specific point about Polanski himself -- of course I have no idea if he committed other crimes.)

[RobinFinderson]

Let me ask the hardliners a question...

If you committed a serious crime in Istanbul, and were about to be thrown into a Turkish prison for ten years, and if you fully believed that while in prison there was a high probability of you getting raped, tortured and eventually murdered, and if you really knew that what you did was wrong, but it wasn't deserving of ten years of rape, torture and possibly murder, and if you were a citizen of a country that would not extradite you to Turkey because of the notoriety of the Turkish penal system, and if you had the chance to get back to your home country where you hoped you could negotiate terms of justice that did not involve a high probability of rape, torture and murder...

... would you flee Turkey, if you had the chance?

[dabrockster]

Let me ask the hardliners a question...

If you committed a serious crime in Istanbul, and were about to be thrown into a Turkish prison for ten years, and if you fully believed that while in prison there was a high probability of you getting raped, tortured and eventually murdered, and if you really knew that what you did was wrong, but it wasn't deserving of ten years of rape, torture and possibly murder, and if you were a citizen of a country that would not extradite you to Turkey because of the notoriety of the Turkish penal system, and if you had the chance to get back to your home country where you hoped you could negotiate terms of justice that did not involve a high probability of rape, torture and murder...

... would you flee Turkey, if you had the chance?

THAT's a load question if I ever saw one... And you are sure bent on trying to compare us to Polanski in a very stretched manner..


I hate to take the easy way out, but in all honesty. I would never be in such a position. The worst crime I have ever committed was having over 20 parking tickets (All paid in full by the way).. It goes to the core of your questions. Will I ever commit such a crime (Nope).. And, if I did, I am pretty sure my moral compass is not that great anyway so I probably see no obligation to face my consequences.. In addition I am pretty sure I would not have the means (Money) to circumvent the system much like Polanski did..

That is one large Fairytale Hypothetical you are talking about here.